Politics

Democrats Are Conjuring Up New 'Rights'

Faced with a president they find repulsive to the core and with unfunded future payment obligations in the many trillions, Democrats think now is the time to really unleash Washington.

|

"Living close to work shouldn't be a luxury for the rich," Democratic presidential candidate and former congressman Beto O'Rourke tweeted in September. "It's a right for everyone."

In a video of a campaign stop embedded in the tweet, the perpetually earnest Texan elaborated on this new right.

"Here's a tough thing to talk about, though we must," O'Rourke said. "Rich people are going to have to allow, or be forced to allow, lower-income people to live near them….We force lower-income, working Americans to drive one, two, three hours in either direction to get to their jobs, very often minimum wage jobs."

There are a half-dozen fuzzy-to-erroneous ideas baked into that language—"we" don't "force" just about anyone to drive two-plus hours a day to and from work, for starters. But the underlying principle is worth pondering, particularly since you see it all over the left side of the political spectrum these days. O'Rourke is urgently demanding a federal role in life choices that are shaped by policies at the state and local level.

The Bill of Rights, famously, focuses on "negative" rights—the stuff that government is prohibited from doing to you. ("Congress shall make no law," etc.) In 1944, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt suggested a "second Bill of Rights" that would put the federal government in the position of affirmatively guaranteeing "positive" outcomes—"the right of every family to a decent home," freedom from "unfair competition and domination by monopolies," and so on.

The idea went nowhere constitutionally, but the principles behind it survived beyond FDR, notably through President Harry Truman's 1949 Fair Deal, which called for such positive goods as universal health care, and which served as a precursor to Lyndon Johnson's Great Society programs of the mid-1960s.

Ambitious, managerial progressivism crashed and burned with the quadruple disappointments of Vietnam, inflation, rising crime, and the longstanding surveillance abuses uncovered in the Watergate scandal. The next two Democratic presidents were both defined by what former California Democratic Gov. Jerry Brown once called the "era of limits." Even President Barack Obama initially coupled his signature domestic expansion of government, the Affordable Care Act, with talk of tackling long-term entitlement reform and enacting a "net spending cut."

That era is no more. Even in the face of renewed trillion-dollar budget deficits and a sitting president who cheerfully abuses power, Democrats are all in on expanding federal and executive authority, locating positive rights under every rock.

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I–Vt.) in September called for national rent control, plus $2.5 trillion in new federal housing-construction money, paid for by a wealth tax on the top 0.1 percent. Sen. Kamala Harris (D–Calif.) is proposing $2 trillion of new spending for historically black colleges and universities alone. That's not enough for former Housing and Urban Development Secretary Julián Castro, who wants that whole smorgasbord plus slavery reparations, as spelled out at the third Democratic presidential primary debate: "We have to connect the dots," he said, "to uplift the quality of life, to invest in housing opportunity, to invest in job opportunity, to invest in community schools that offer resources like parents able to go back and get their GED, and health care opportunities, and those things that truly ensure that the entire family can prosper." Is that all?

On the narrower issue of housing, Democratic presidential candidates are proposing the same types of policies—rent control, subsidies, tax hikes, limitations of property rights—that are already on the books in places where housing is expensive and commutes are long, such as Los Angeles, San Francisco, and New York. Unlike the Sunbelt metro areas where housing is cheap, these places also happen to be run by Democrats.

On the broader issue of philosophical rights, there is genuine cause for despair. A previous generation's myriad governing failures and roster of political creeps led to a productive period of skepticism about what the federal government should try to do. But faced with a president they find repulsive to the core and with unfunded future payment obligations in the many trillions, Democrats think now is the time to really unleash Washington. You have the right to remain pessimistic.

Advertisement

NEXT: Videos of Panels on Sanctuary Cities and Constitutional Property Rights

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

    1. Warning! Full-on Hihnfection ahead!

      1. Get a life.

      2. What ever happened to (G)Reasonable which would allow one to skip Hihn’s keyboard farts?

    2. No wonder Obama’s not interested in any dem candidates. They’re basically going around saying his signature achievement is garbage.
      But “O” convinced the public healthcare was the government’s responsibility, so he won no matter what.

  1. But faced with a president they find repulsive to the core and with unfunded future payment obligations in the many trillions, Democrats think now is the time to really unleash Washington.

    Of course Welch finds a way to blame Donald Trump for the coming socialist nightmare.

    JUST KIDDING. There is no level of federal incompetence that will deter those determined to buy their way into office with other people’s tax dollars. Like communism itself, giving DC decision-making power over the lives of the little people just hasn’t been tried by the right group. Despair we should.

    1. Those decisions made D.C. and the surrounding suburbs overwhelmingly rich! They are working!

    2. Well, it looks like Socialists vs Fascists in 2020 … with the libertarian establishment pissing and moaning, having no policy solutions …for anything … in over a quarter century.

      Meanwhile, over 60% of Americans would self-identify with libertarian values — fiscally conservative and socially liberal — but 91% of them reject the libertarian label. (Cato survey, conducted by a top independent pollster.)

      The voiceless majority.

      Americans are now open to even radical change, which happens only once or twice per century. Can libertarianism restore a movement, and reject today’s cult? (A cult is when you’ve been rejected by 91% of the people who hold the values you now pay only lip service to)

      “Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain, and most fools do.”
      –Benjamin Franklin

      “Complaining about a problem, without posing a solution, is whining.”
      -Theodore Roosevelt

      “Wise men speak because they have something to say. Fools speak because they have to say something”
      Plato

      “Mass movements do not need a god, but they do need a devil. Hatred unifies the True Believers.”
      -Eric Hoffer, “The True Believers” (1951)

      “Throughout human history, the worst moral atrocities have been committed by those manipulated to BELIEVE they are defending some “greater good” — the Collective, the State, the Master Race, the Party or a God. Zealots and fanatics. The militant self-righteous.”
      -Mike Hihn (1994)
      (Trump is the enabler of the alt-right empowered by Ron Paul).

      Left – Right = Zero

      1. Why do you have a new name? What happened to the old one (or two, or 3)? Why haven’t you learned from it?

        Ask yourself those questions and reflect on the answers before ever posting again.

        1. COWARDLY EVASION.
          BY DRIZZLE
          WHO THEN SCROLLED DOWN TO AGAIN PUBLICLY HUMILIATE HIMSELF!! https://reason.com/2019/11/17/democrats-are-conjuring-up-new-rights/#comment-8015419

          Behold the snarling cowardice of the alt-right … totally devoid of any substance at all … like today’s libertarian establishment.

            1. Sevo
              Fuck off and die,

            2. Here is where it starts.
              I call upon the moderators to ban these people as disruptors of civil discourse.
              Please take your personal grievances somewhere else.
              This could have been an interesting discussion.
              Sadly, no one would be interested in joining this profane and hateful screed.

              1. Who allowed YOU here? 🙂

          1. Well, that degenerated quickly. One questioning reply and full-on Hinh.

            1. One FAILED reply …liar. Instead of you being ANOTHER whiny pussy … RESPOND TO THE CHALLENGE. NAME THE POLICIES.

              One questioning reply

              THAT WAS A PERSONAL ASSAULT … JUST AS COWARDLY AS YOURS

              and full-on Hinh.

              Like here … SELF-DEFENSE FROM UNPROVOKED AGGRESSION. (This one to also a liar)

              Any comments on Dizzle’s self-humiliation I linked to? Inconvenient to your narrative? 🙂

                1. NAME THE POLICIES, COWARD
                  Why did you LIE about Dizzle’s “response?”

                  Like here … SELF-DEFENSE FROM UNPROVOKED AGGRESSION. (This one to also a liar)

                  Any comments on Dizzle’s self-humiliation I linked to? INCONVENIENT TO YOUR WHINY NARRATIVE? ????

                  (boldface in self-defense, AGAIN)

          2. Hihnfaggot, no one reads your insane bullshit. We must see your sock handle scroll down and tell you to fuck off.

            Now fuck off.

            1. I wouldn’t poke Hihn too much if I were you. That guy just screams “deranged stalker”.

              1. That’s what a stalker IS, goober.
                (they have VERY low IQs)

      2. In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move. Douglas Adams

        Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that ‘my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.’ Isaac Asimov

        Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want and deserve to get it good and hard. H.L. Mencken

        An arrogant person can be humbled, an ignorant person can learn. Someone afflicted with a healthy dose of both can’t be told anything. Derek Hunter

      3. Meanwhile, over 60% of Americans would self-identify with libertarian values — fiscally conservative and socially liberal — but 91% of them reject the libertarian label. (Cato survey, conducted by a top independent pollster so long ago that the results are now irrelevant.)

        Corrected for truth.

        1. Cowardly diversion … IT’S EVEN HIGHER NOW … ON GAY MARRIAGE ALONE. (smirk)

          1. THEN WHY DON’T YOU CITE THAT POLL, SELECTIVE TRUTH TELLER?

            Moron.

            1. For this, too, the boldface is in self-defense … now to enhance my ridicule of him.

              a) READ IT AGAIN, WHAT I SAID, SLICK.
              b) IT’S YOUR JOB, NOT MINE TO SUPPORT YOUR WHINY DENIAL.
              (Umm, those are two separate issues)

              Anyone else in a SCREAMING RAGE that support for gay marriage has increased roughly 75% since 2005?

              Goobers may need an explanation.

              a) The left never opposed gay marriage, especially dumbfuck right-wing bullshit about God’s will (Marriage was not a religious sacrament until 1500 years after the death of Christ.)

              b) Thus, a swing THAT great MUST come mostly from the right — which would make them … fiscally conservative and socially liberal!! (lol). ESPECIALLY the roughly 1/3 of white Evangelicals who now support gay marriage (THEY aren’t fiscally liberal).

              Get to da Chipper — who CELEBRATES feeding people into wood chippers, anyone who DARES to disagree with his bellowing … well, his tribe is nearing extinction, so he shouts down reality as in-con-veeeen-yent.

              (Why the FUCK would so aggressive a THUG even care about libertarianism?)

              1. Oh look, incoherent babbling and not one answer to my very simple question.

                1. AGAIN FAILS TO SUPPORT HIS COWARDLY DENIAL

                  a) READ IT AGAIN, WHAT I SAID, SLICK. b) IT’S YOUR JOB, NOT MINE TO SUPPORT YOUR WHINY DENIAL.
                  (Umm, those are two separate issues)

                  not one answer to my very simple question.

                  TWO answers, chump.
                  SUPPORT YOUR ASSERTION. PUT UP OR SHUT UP.
                  Or will you feed ME into a wood chipper, thug?

                  1. What cowardly denial are you talking about, idiot? IT MUST BE YOUR OWN.

                    I merely once again informed people that the Cato poll you love to cite (herpa derpa 91% of fiscal conservative/social liberal individuals reject the libertarian label) is so fucking ancient that its results are no longer relevant and, like the rest of your lunatic blathering, can be thoroughly ignored. IIRC, it’s from 2005?
                    2007? Either way it’s more than a decade old at this point. YET YOU, SELECTIVE TRUTH TELLER, ARE CONSISTENTLY MORE THAN HAPPY TO LEAVE OUT THAT TRUTHFUL DETAIL IN YOUR MEANDERING TEXTUAL DIARRHEA. Why is that, I wonder?

                    And only an idiot like you would think I support feeding people into woodchippers based on my handle, or would try to gain victim points by suggesting I’ve made some sort of threat of such to you or anyone else.

                    1. STILL FAILS …. REFUSES TO DEFEND HIS BULLSHIT … ADDS MORE LIES..

                      YOU NEED ANOTHER POLL TO PROVE ME WRONG … OR DISPROVE THE PRO-LIBERTARIAN CHANGES I POINTED TO SINCE 2005 …. WHINING LIKE A PUSSY AIN’T ENOUGH.

                      YOU MUST SHOW THAT CHANGE HAS BEEN NEGATIVE SINCE 2005 … OR MAKE A BIGGER ASS OF YOURSELF BY DENYING THE PRO-LIBERTY CHANGES I LAID OUT … *I* did more than your screeching and bullying, chump.

                      And only an idiot like you would think I support feeding people into woodchippers based on my handle

                      That’s what it’s meant in these comments for over four years. PROOF AT THE END, COWARD,

                      YET YOU, SELECTIVE TRUTH TELLER, ARE CONSISTENTLY MORE THAN HAPPY TO LEAVE OUT THAT TRUTHFUL DETAIL IN YOUR MEANDERING TEXTUAL DIARRHEA. Why is that, I wonder?

                      (sneer) BECAUSE YOU’RE A RAVING, CRAZED PSYCHO. I EXPLICITLY STATED “2005” … IN RIDICULING YOUR LYING ASS, punk.

                      Anyone else in a SCREAMING RAGE that support for gay marriage has increased roughly 75% since 2005?

                      You are now PROVEN a pathetic liar.

                      NOW, WHAT PART OF THIS CONFUSES YOUR SORRY ASS, Goober?

                      Goobers may need an explanation.

                      a) The left never opposed gay marriage, especially dumbfuck right-wing bullshit about God’s will (Marriage was not a religious sacrament until 1500 years after the death of Christ.)

                      b) Thus, a swing THAT great MUST come mostly from the right — which would make them … fiscally conservative and socially liberal!! (lol). ESPECIALLY the roughly 1/3 of white Evangelicals who now support gay marriage (THEY aren’t fiscally liberal – snort).

                      REFUSES to support his bullshit.
                      FAILS to show A SINGLE NEGATIVE CHANGE SINCE 2005, TO OFFSET THE MAJOR POSITIVE CHANGE I CITED … which CONFIRMS him as a BELLOWING BLOWHARD.

                      NOW TO YOUR WOODCHIPPER ASSAULT MENTALITY

                      Popehat, a top civil liberties website, posted this in 2015 … A TOTAL DISGRACE to libertarians.

                      “…Reason …. whose clever writing is eclipsed only by the blowhard stupidity of its commenting peanut gallery

                      http://bit.ly/2ULGXer

                      “Its judges like these that should be taken out back and shot.

                      “It’s judges like these that WILL be taken out back and shot. .

                      “Why waste ammunition? Wood chippers get the message across clearly. Especially if you feed them in feet first.

                      “Why do it out back? Shoot them out front, on the steps of the courthouse.

                      “I hope there is a special place in hell reserved for that horrible (judge).

                      “Fuck that. I don’t want to pay for that cunt’s food, housing, and medical. Send her through the wood chipper.”

                      Since then there have been over two dozen “woodchipper” handles … ALL BY COWARDLY BULLIES LIKE YOURSELF — “Get To Da chipper.” — defined as “blowhard stupidity” on a MAJOR civil liberties web site.

                      You fucked up. Stop making an even bigger ass of yourself … PUT UP OR SHUT UP!

                      “Mess with the bull; get the horns”

                    2. Hihnfaggot eats his own shit. Fresh out of his adult Depends.

                    3. YOU NEED ANOTHER POLL TO PROVE ME WRONG … OR DISPROVE THE PRO-LIBERTARIAN CHANGES I POINTED TO SINCE 2005 …. WHINING LIKE A PUSSY AIN’T ENOUGH.

                      YOU MUST SHOW THAT CHANGE HAS BEEN NEGATIVE SINCE 2005 … OR MAKE A BIGGER ASS OF YOURSELF BY DENYING THE PRO-LIBERTY CHANGES I LAID OUT … *I* did more than your screeching and bullying, chump.

                      Actually, I don’t, imbecile. All I did was point out how dated your precious statistic was, and suggested that a fourteen-year old statistic is a worthless data point. What people do with that TRUTHFUL information is their own business.

                      That’s what it’s meant in these comments for over four years. PROOF AT THE END, COWARD,

                      More bullshit, you intellectual liability. It was, and has always been, a show of support for the people the government targeted for posting rash but unthreatening posts on a public forum. We’re all well aware that it’s too subtle a point for a dullard like you to comprehend, but your willful or unwitting ignorance doesn’t change the truth of the matter.

                      (sneer) BECAUSE YOU’RE A RAVING, CRAZED PSYCHO. I EXPLICITLY STATED “2005” … IN RIDICULING YOUR LYING ASS, punk.

                      You did so state… to support a point I wasn’t arguing, dullard. When did I ever say anything about gay marriage, moron? FInd that and quote it, dipshit. You should probably work harder to learn how to form a coherent sequence of sentences together in order to make a paragraph that people who are fluent in English can understand.

                    4. All I did was point out how dated your precious statistic was,

                      REPEAT: Compared with NO statistic

                      (sneer) BECAUSE YOU’RE A RAVING, CRAZED PSYCHO. I EXPLICITLY STATED “2005” … IN RIDICULING YOUR LYING ASS, punk.

                      You did so state

                      Thanks for admitting you lied. But why new lies, when the truth is so visible?

                      When did I ever say anything about gay marriage, moron? FInd that and quote it, dipshit

                      WHOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOSH

                      That was my example that fiscally conservative and socially, liberal had INCREASED .,.. SHARPLY ,… since 2005.
                      Unlike you, I don’t screech and scream childish insults.
                      What I do is called a “supported argument.”
                      You REFUSE to support yours.
                      One more time for the morally impaired. I’ll go slower.

                      1) OBVIOUSLY the data has changed since 2005. I gave solid examples that the change was positive,

                      2) You ASSUMED the change has been negative … REFUSED to support your assumption … and have REPEATEDLY assaulted me for DARING to suggest that OPINIONS ARE INFERIOR TO FACTS

                      Since you are the exact opposite of libertarian … why are your brinnies in such an uproar?

                      Now, return to the only behavior you seem competent of … having ENTERED the thread with an unprovoked attack.

                    5. “REPEAT: Compared with NO statistic”

                      REPEAT: THE ONUS IS NOT UPON ME TO PROVIDE DATA WHEN ALL I AM DOING IS POINTING OUT HOW OLD YOUR CHERISHED DATA IS, MORON.

                      “That was my example that fiscally conservative and socially, liberal had INCREASED .,.. SHARPLY ,… since 2005.”

                      WHICH AGAIN HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH THE AGE OF YOUR CHERISHED STATISTIC, DIMWIT. Just more of your textual diarrhea with which you occasionally pollute this website.

                      Unlike you, I don’t screech and scream childish insults.

                      This is a blatant lie: “(sneer) BECAUSE YOU’RE A RAVING, CRAZED PSYCHO.”

                      What I do is called a “supported argument.”

                      That is a bigger lie.

                      You REFUSE to support yours.

                      And that is an even bigger one. Feeding you is a waste of good food, Hihn.

      4. Trump is far less fascistic than the Progressive Left; remember at all times a Progressive is a Socialist is a Communist is a Fascist is a Nazi. The differences are purely cosmetic.

        N ow, Trump is a mountebank, a snack oil salesman, and quite possibly the reincarnation of Huey Long. But whatever he has done wrong, he has not preached violence in the streets against his political enemies. He has not closed any media outlets, he has simply insisted that if they get to call him evil names, he gets to call THEM evil names.

        Seriously; on a dozen occasions I have backed somebody who said Tump was an opponent ion Freedom of Speech and it always boiled down to he called them nasty names, boo hoo!

        1. Remember at all times a Progressive is a Socialist is a Communist is a Fascist is a Nazi. The differences are purely cosmetic.

          Only to the alt-right.

          Among the educated, fascism can be EITHER left (Mussolini ) or right (Hitler’s nazis) Mussolini, on the left was NOT a Nazi!!

          THE EXISTENCE OF PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS NOT “PURELY COSMETIC”

          Thus, Trump is AT LEAST equally fascist with the progressive left.
          (Not to deny those Stalinesque gulags, Sweden and Denmark.)

          <blockquote?But whatever he has done wrong, he has not preached violence in the streets against his political enemies.AT HIS RALLIES

          He has not closed any media outlets, he has simply insisted that if they get to call him evil names, he gets to call THEM evil names.

          I’m sure most Foxtards have swallowed that lie, on faith alone.

        2. Actually, he has preached violence in the streets against his political enemies. He has called for the “2d Amendment crowd” to take action against his enemies, and “warns” of (calls for) violent uprising if he is impeached. To his credit, he has not closed the media outlets, but he is no libertarian. He believes in whatever will help him, and people like him, extend dominance over everyone else, and get away with whatever he wants. He let a few people out of prison, and agreed to some prison reform, not out of principle, but to impress a pretty actress whose pussy he would like to grab. Whatever people believe about what are America’s problems and how to fix them (and there is plenty of reasonable ground for disagreement), most reasonable people believe that the answers will not be found in Trump, the least intellectual president of modern times.

          1. So you are suggesting one of the fascist or communist Progs would be better? Trump has proven he is a paper tiger – part due to incompetence, part due to ADHD – and at least gets the time right twice a day. Which is twice more than the Donkeys.

            1. So you are suggesting one of the fascist or communist Progs would be better?

              How many of THEM are so fucking stupid on what communism is?

              On fascism, Trump is actually worse.

              1. Remember when Trump declared the authority to kill American citizens without trial and used the federal bureaucracy against his political opponents, including spying on an opposition presidential campaign? Or am I thinking of someone else?

                1. That was Obama … thus PROVING you a MINDLESS TWIT who ASS-umes anyone who dislikes Trump MUST be an Obama supporter.

                  You also pulled another cowardly evasion

                  So you are suggesting one of the fascist or communist Progs would be better?

                  How many of THEM are so fucking stupid on what communism is?

                  You are well-named, Scum.

              2. Oops! I missed this. 🙁

                including spying on an opposition presidential campaign? Or am I thinking of someone else?

                You are NOT thinking … just another manipulated tool of the political elites.

          2. He has called for the “2d Amendment crowd” to take action against his enemies

            People not suffereing from TDS see this as legal action and activism.

            nd “warns” of (calls for) violent uprising if he is impeached

            Lie.

            dominance over everyone else

            Except for all the talk of and action on dissolution of power of the federal government.

            the least intellectual president of modern time

            He is not ideal from a libertarian perspective but he is vastly superior to the previous president, whom you would probably identify as the most intellectual.

            1. How does a Rebel Scum twist and turn facts, to support his slavish devotion to a fucking thug.

              He has called for the “2d Amendment crowd” to take action against his enemies

              People not suffering from TDS see this as legal action and activism.

              So ..;. when your KKK hung niggers, that was … activism?

              dominance over everyone else

              Except for all the talk of and action on dissolution of power of the federal government.

              Dominance over CONSENT OF THE GOVERNED.

              Only Rebel SCUM could defend Trump’s SHAMEFUL BULLSHIT, in defense of NAZIS and WHITE NATIONALISTS for launching violent assaults in Charlottesville. (shudder)

              1. when your KKK hung niggers, that was … activism?

                No, that is assault/murder. I see that you are a dishonest and incoherent piece of shit. Slow down on the drugs, bruh.

                1. Rebel SCUM LIES ABOUT WHAT WAS SAID

                  He has called for the “2d Amendment crowd” to take action against his enemies

                  People not suffering from TDS see this as legal action and activism.

                  So … when your KKK hung niggers, that was … activism?

                  No, that is assault/murder

                  UNLESS TRUMP CALLS FOR IT!!

                  I see that you are a dishonest and incoherent piece of shit

                  I just PROVED you a FRAUD, chump.

                  Why are they ALL as bad as Trump?

          3. Plus we have video of him begging his post-Soviet masters to invade Hillary’s server, too!

            #nevercouldtakeajoke

            1. That’s back when Putin obeyed Trump.

      5. Meanwhile, over 60% of Americans would self-identify with libertarian values — fiscally conservative and socially liberal — but 91% of them reject the libertarian label.

        Yeah, that’s because toxic a–holes like you have poisoned the libertarian label. I’m not speaking figuratively here, Hihn: you literally were part of the big-L Libertarian party establishment as it was going downhill. So don’t shift the blame for your failures onto others.

        1. YOU are the toxic one, RETARD.
          YOU are the aggressor, PUNK

          1. YOU are the toxic one, RETARD. YOU are the aggressor, PUNK

            Be that as it may, I can’t be responsible for the “91% of Americans that reject the libertarian label” because I don’t call myself a libertarian and was not active in the Libertarian Party.

            You, however, did both of those things. You have been part of the public face of libertarianism in the US, and I think you’re pretty typical for the LP in your conduct. It’s not surprising Americans don’t identify as libertarian with people like you being the face of it.

            1. The real question is, did eating his own shit make Hihnfaggot this crazy, or did he get this crazy, and start eating his own shit?

            2. Now the crazy-ass Trumptards ass-ume EVERY MEMBER OF THE LIBERTARIAN PARTY … PAST AND PRESENT … SHARES EQUAL BLAME OR CREDIT FOR EVERYTHING.

              PLUS (smirk) THE 91% ARE DEFINED AS FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE AND SOCIALLY LIBERAL, AND .,.. UMM … I’M THE ONLY ONE HERE WHO REPEATEDLY DEFENDS THOSE VALUES.

          2. *You* just got burned. It’s neck-beard fools like you that turn people off of the Libertarian brand.

            I think you need to add NOYB2 to your enemies list.

            1. There is no enemies list. You been brainwashed AGAIN.

              1. Brainwashed? *You* have posted the link to it. Multiple times.

                1. Of course I couldn’t prove that. Because Reason’s staff got so sick of your crap that they banned your handle and scrubbed all of your old posts off the boards.

                  An honor previously accorded only to mental patients and child molesters.

                  1. PROVEN PSYCHO LIAR GOES TOTALLY OFF TRACK

                2. There is no enemies list. You been brainwashed AGAIN.
                  Brainwashed? *You* have posted the link to it. Multiple times.

                  PATHETIC FUCKING PSYCHO LIAR.

                  http://libertyissues.com/reason2.htm

                  ROGUES GALLERY — REASON THUGS
                  This was created because it’s easier for me than constantly reposting the PROOF that these goobers’ non-stop assaults and aggression are …. bat-shit crazy … as they scurry around like cockroaches.

                  The Authoritarian Right has always hated libertarians
                  fiscal responsibility and social tolerance for a half-century

                  Archive of my published writing on Taxes, Health Care and New Federalism

                  The Sickest of the Sick Fucks … NOW say this is my “enemies” list, making me the aggressor … instead of them. Cyber-bullies be TOTAL psychos! Because my link to this page also exposes THAT mental affliction.

                  MUCH MORE PROOF ON THAT PAGE

                  I also did not get “burned” … just because some psycho snarls a childish insult that you (a similar psycho) applauded.

                  1. I’m well aware of your published writings. Too bad you’ve stepped off the deep end since. And, despite your constant denial, that page is an enemies list.

                    No, you didn’t get “burned”, you got banned. Not an insult, it’s a fact, as evidenced by the fact all of your Hihn posts got scrubbed from the site.

                    1. Why am I still here, chump?

                      Because … they DEFEND your alt-right hate speech .,.. saying they defend “free speech” … A FUCKING LIE THAT YOU JUST CONFIRMED!!!!

                      BUT THEY CENSOR libertarian speech … which is FRAUD, and bigotry … in support of the alt-right (of Ron Paul)

                      I’m still here because I post regularly, whenever I trap somebody like you … . that I take full screen shots of this entire page … as advised by my attorney … So, if they censor THIS they KNOW they trigger a lawsuit … plus dozens of pages of PROOF to the Reason Foundation Board of Directors

                      AND YOU JUST PROVED THE SLANDERS AGAINST ME.
                      What a jackass!

                    2. No, you didn’t get “burned”

                      THANK YOU FOR RETRACTING YOUR CRAZY-FUCK LIE!!!

                      https://reason.com/2019/11/17/democrats-are-conjuring-up-new-rights/#comment-8016353

                    3. *I’m* alt-right, am I? Show me one post that would indicate to a non-dementia patient where I endorse anything alt-right. You can’t. You’re just using the progs’ hate-label-of-the-moment because you don’t have anything coherent to say.

                      As far as you asking why you’re still here, I dunno, you tell me. After getting all of your posts scrubbed from the site, being insulted and told hourly to kill yourself (something I think is disgusting, by the way) and failing to convince anyone of anything through your sneer/ass-rape threat, bold-face insult tactics, I have no absolutely no idea why you’re still here. Seems like you’d be happier elsewhere.

                    4. As far as you asking why you’re still here, I dunno, you tell me.

                      I JUST DID!!
                      You responded to it!
                      🙂
                      🙂
                      🙂

          3. YOU are the reason sane people actually start to re-think the First Amendment.

            1. MAKE A PUBLIC ASS OF YOURSELF??
              ONLY BULLIES, THUGS AND ASSORTED ASSHOLES QUESTION THE FIRST AMENDMENT.

              Individual rights are INNATE .,… INHERENT to humankind .,.. as endowed by a Creator. Except to the PHONY conservatives on the Authoritarian Right, shameless as they are — burning books and censoring for centuries. The New Inquisition.
              (smirk)

                1. Learn to read you senile fucktard.

                  DID THIS RIGHT-WING PSYCHO QUESTION THE FIRST AMENDMENT? DID I CALL HIM OUT AS AN AUTHORITARIAN THUG.

                  Judge for yourself. .*I* always defend and support YOUR right to make up your own mind …, even if we disagree! … As long as your disagreement does not cause you to assault me .. , or BABBLE about denying my fundamental rights

                  He said:

                  YOU are the reason sane people actually start to re-think the First Amendment

                  He “thinks” that calling HIMSELF sane justifies his shameful mentality

                  My response

                  Individual rights are INNATE .,… INHERENT to humankind .,.. as endowed by a Creator. Except to the PHONY conservatives on the Authoritarian Right, shameless as they are — burning books and censoring for centuries. The New Inquisition.
                  (smirk)

                  Again, followed by THIS assholery

                  Learn to read you senile fucktard.

                  The defense rests.

                  Readers judge for yourselves (if you choose to judge)

          1. So many guess it’s all Hihnfaggot’s fault the LP has fallen apart. Figures, since he’s just a worthless progtard after all.

            Not one little bit libertarian.

            1. Posted in self-defense of another unprovoked assault by a serial stalking Trumptard/Thug (same thing)

              The “LP” has NEVER been a part of this topic. Now MORE proof of what you REALLY are

              Figures, since he’s just a worthless progtard after all.

              (smirk) This links to the web archive of my published writing..
              http://libertyissues.com/archive.htm
              Check my “progtard” views on …Taxes … Health Care…. Education …
              New Federalism + Liberty Issues Tax Plan

              Then join me in RIDICULING this bully.

              ***Now some details***
              *** ONLY TAXPAYERS CAN DRAIN THE SWAMP, TRUMPTARD … *I* KNOW HOW … YOU BE TOO DUMB … just another trashmouth thug

              Each state would establish its own federalism, as determined by their own VOTERS. As I describe, when government programs are funded by 2-3 levels of government, NOBODY can be held accountable. That’s intentional..

              ***Conservatards have NOTHING for this …and SABOTAGED Reagan’s attempt

              MY way, every program would be totally run at ONE level of government, for … ummmm …., ACCOUNTABILITY.

              FORCED ACCOUNTABILITY …. as each state’s voters would decide what THEIR state would be accountable for.

              I EMPOWER PEOPLE … NOT GOVERNMENT …
              YOU EMPOWER … TRUMP! (LOL)

              That’s just the beginning. Now I CRUSH any lyin’ sack of shit who says I’m a “progtard” …. because, to their “mind,” EVERYONE is a progtard who can think for themself.

              ***REAL LIBERTARIANS call this “Competing Governments … one of MANY actual solutions … SNEERED AT by anti-gummint goobers ( today’s phony conservatives and libertarians.)

              Every ten years. State and Federal would COMPETE for the POWER they crave … the financing and control of each and every program … WITH VOTERS PICKING THE WINNERS IN EACH STATE.

              Umm, the federal competence is equal in each state, but state’s are not. Two or three states might join together and run a joint Medicaid (OR PRIVATIZE IT!)

              ***JUST LIKE FREE-MARKET COMPETITION! (for any conservatards and loosertarians who FAIL to grasp what that means)

              STATES WOULD BE REWARDED FOR GOOD MANAGEMENT … BY CUTTING SPENDING…. OR IMPROVING RESULTS …. IN COMPETITION WITH FEDERAL … AS FORCED BY THEIR NOW-EMPOWERED VOTERS.
              WHOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO0000OOSH over the heads of Trumptards

              WHAT DO MY ATTACKERS HAVE??? OTHER THAN SCREECHING, WHINING AND UNPROVOKED ASSAULTS?

              I also have a related tax plan … a flat tax is STOOPID … because progressive rates subsidize half the entire middle-class tax burden .. Conservatards KNOW the rich pay a disproportionate share of the income tax … but are too fucking dense to see WHY that means a flat tax is crazy. … JUNIOR HIGH MATH (OMFG)

              The Fair (consumption) Tax is even crazier! It does NOT take a genius to know the rich consume a much smaller share of their income … so that would create an even LARGER middle-class tax increase.

              ALSO UNKNOWN TO TRUMPTARDS
              But I’m actually a progtard. (smirk)

              Plus, with government so huge, ANY single flat tax … on consumption or income … MUST create a MASSIVE distortion in markets … ALSO beyond the grasp of anti-gumint goobers, both on the right and libertarian.

              ***PAY ATTENTION, GOOBERS***

              The ONLY way for flat tax rates to NOT distort markets is … wait for it … the same flat rate on BOTH income and consumption. WHOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOSH!

              PLUS, for MAXIMUM benefit of VERY LOW FLAT RATES is ,… a 0.9% tax on CAPITAL transactions ….. the MULTI-TRILLION dollars of ALL market and investment acquisitions. BUT I’M JUST A PROGTARD. (SNEER)

              The other federal flat rates could be
              a) 9% on income over $25,000 or so … NO TAX RETURNS
              b) 9% consumption tax would exempt the same as most states: food, rent, utilities, and the like.

              This created MORE tax revenue, the last I checked … and MAXIMUM incentives for future growth .,.. ALL BY A PROGTARD!!
              Trumptards have … NOTHING …. NOT EVEN A CLUE

              For lowest OVERHEAD, copy Canada. Their feds collect and forward their Provincial (our STATE) income taxes. This wipes out the state-level income tax department. AND simplifies employer deductions and payments

              ****BUT I’M JUST A PROGTARD **** (snort)

              For the new federal consumption tax … state sales tax departments collect and forward THAT tax.

              (This solves what killed Reagan’s. Republicans killed it by giving states the program responsibility. but NO control over revenues.)

              **** WHAT HAVE YOU GOT, LAST OF THE SHITHEADS?***

              You thought they screeched like a bat-shit crazy vampires BEFORE
              Watch what I did to them here!!!

              Click my link, confirm all this, then join me in ridiculing the Bellowing Blowhards of Trumpistan. (They’ll still keep assaulting. It’s all they have, since they were playground bullies in kindergarten.)

              (sneer)

              1. JEASUS Christ.

                Will someone please take his LifeAlert away so the next time he falls making his oatmeal, it will the last and final, that everyone is so diligently praying for?

                1. “FUCK SELF-DEFENSE” says ANOTHER crazed Trumptard’s unprovoked assault.

                  DID HE JUST ASSAULT:
                  1) Empowering voters instead of Trump? YES!
                  2) REPEALING all progressive tax rates? YES!.
                  3) Showing WHY a flat tax is favored by dumbasses? YES!
                  4) Forcing federal and state governments from COMPETING FOR POWER .,.. with voters awarding the winning bid? YES!
                  5) Wiping out state income tax departments? YES!
                  6) Which simplifies payroll tax submissions for employers? YES!

                  BECAUSE HE AND LAST OF THE SHIT HEADS HAVE …. ABSOLUTELY NOTHING BETTER???!!

                  They travel in a pack, like wild dogs.

                  AND AGAIN PROVE ME CORRECT! 🙂

                  You thought they screeched like bat-shit crazy vampires BEFORE Watch what I did to them here!!!

                  Click my link, confirm all this, then join me in ridiculing the Bellowing Blowhards of Trumpistan. (They’ll still keep assaulting. It’s all they have, since they were playground bullies in kindergarten.)

                  Check the link, chump. (sneer)

            2. Last of the Shit Heads
              Not one little bit libertarian.

              Did it hurt (much) when I JAMMED THAT UP YOU ASS?
              When I twisted it?

      6. “Everything is so terrible and unfair”.

        – Ben, teddy, Plato, etc…….

        Haha.

      7. I just want to know what socially liberal means. Does that mean if someone tells me they’re a unicorn that I accept them and their life choices with jubilation?

        1. I just want to know what socially liberal means.

          Tolerant. Specifically, one does not seek government force to impose your own personal values on anyone.

          It helps us expose the moral hypocrisy so prominent on both the left and right. Specifically.

          a) Liberals want government out of your bedroom and into your wallet.
          That’s the opposite of fiscally conservative.

          b) Conservatives want government out of your wallet and into your bedroom. That’s the opposite of socially liberal.

          Both are pro-government authoritarians … opposed to individual liberty, equal, unalienable and/or God-given rights.

          And both are now a minority of Americans, combined.

          Does that mean if someone tells me they’re a unicorn that I accept them and their life choices with jubilation

          I assume you heard such nonsense from the wacko right. It simply means you do not persecute them for what they believe, as long as they are no threat to you.
          What sort of person would support state persecution of someone who is no threat to them? Or deny them equal rights?

          I’ll assume you’re quite young. The World’s Smallest Political Quiz has been taken by millions of people over several decades. In addition to the quiz, it uses the Nolan Chart to show why left and right are obsolete. BOTH have authoritarian AND libertarian elements, which means neither can represent libertarian views … libertarian being the noun form of liberty.

          https://www.theadvocates.org/quiz/

          If you have anything else, just ask. Be aware that I may not be back, and their are very few libertarians who comments here. (80-90% of the READERS are libertarians but never comment, which is normal for online forums.

          Does that mean if someone tells me they’re a unicorn that I accept them and their life choices with jubilation?

  2. “Not having water splash your bum when you make poops shouldn’t be a luxury for the rich,” Democratic presidential candidate and former congressman Beto O’Rourke tweeted in September. “It’s a right for everyone.”

    “Here’s a tough thing to talk about, though we must,” O’Rourke said. “Rich people are going to have to allow, or be forced to allow, water to christen their rumps….We force lower-income, working Americans to get their butts wet. Sometimes their butts turn blue if they’re a construction worker and used a porta-potty.”

    1. Don’t rich people have bidets?

      1. Beto is referring to splashbacks

        1. I got that, thank you.

          1. You’re welcome.
            #crapsplashequalityNOW

  3. As a Koch / Reason libertarian, I prioritize #ImmigrationAboveAll. So whether it’s a “conjured” right or not, I believe the most important right is the ability of anyone on the planet to immigrate to the US at any time and for any reason. Democrats support that right; Republicans do not.

    #VoteDemocratForOpenBorders

    1. You don’t want them immigrating and possibly being poor though, what are you willing to offer these wonderful people when they get here?

      1. Freedom. Learn what it means

        1. Freedom or free stuff?

          1. Immigrants have lower rates of incarceration and welfare than native Americans. And on actual transfers of wealth, our middle class are THE biggest mooches on the planet — they get all the entitlements and the rich pay half or more of their federal taxes (mostly thanks to Bush2’s GOP)

              1. YOU CITED AN ANTI-IMMIGRATION WEB SITE …. SAYS SO RIGHT UNDER ITS NAME.
                That’s like citing Rachel Maddow as a source on Trump

                And lotsa sources, no links, and the few I checked did NOT say what he says.

                1. Ad hominem (Latin for “to the person”),[1] short for argumentum ad hominem, typically refers to a fallacious argumentative strategy whereby genuine discussion of the topic at hand is avoided by instead attacking the character, motive, or other attribute of the person making the argument, or persons associated with the argument, rather than attacking the substance of the argument itself.[2]

                  Wikipedia is an authoritative source too!

                  1. Ad hominem may not apply if the source has been shown to be unreliable or intentionally biased on the same subject in the past. While it is still possible that the assertion is correct in this instance there is good reason to question it based on the source. An example would be quoting an article from Stormfront to support an assertion about holocaust history.

                    A better example of the fallacy would be attacking an article about the economics of corn prices by claiming that the author cheated on his wife.

                    I don’t know anything about this source but pointing that out.

                    1. No, it’s still the same fallacy. Failing to engage an argument by attacking the source instead of the argument is always fallacious even in cases where the source is unreliable. If you’re going to fall back on that fallacious argumentation you could at least give a cursory reason as to why the source is unreliable rather than simply assert it with no evidence or argumentation. It becomes a red herring fallacy at that point, but it’s at least in the ballpark of validity. Hihn, of course, can’t even differentiate one person from another as his brain is wracked by the inevitable and steady deterioration of senile dementia, so expecting him to comprehend the discussion is far too much to ask.

                    2. In this case jesseAZ has only provided one source to support his argument. From an organization which has a specific stated policy goal of “low immigration”. I think it is up to Jesse to provide additional data from other sources to back up his assertion if he wishes to make a more convincing argument. He may be correct but the potential for bias is clearly stated by the source.

                      The fallacy occurs if you try and make a proof statement based on the source. It is not a fallacy to question reliability of data and making the point inconclusive pending further evidence. This is why scientific papers rarely make firm conclusions and always include a list of limitations, potential biases, and any possible conflicts of interest by the authors.

                    3. I’ve provided a source that links and produces all source material. You’ve produced nothing echo, like the ignorant dumbass you are.

                      Strange how that always happens with open borders idiots. I can link to a lot more negative externalities to illegal immigration, but youd refuse to read then as well.

                    4. I am not refuting you or discussing your point at all jessieAZ. It is not what I was getting at.

                      I was replying to Donna who I think is misapplying the concept of ad hominem fallacy. Yet you resort to personal attacks over rational discussion.

                      It is fine to cite one source to support an argument. I do that as well. There is nothing wrong in that which I said. We are only allowed one link per post here in any case.

                      It is equally valid to question bias, methodology, sample size, statistical power, confounding factors, conflicting data from other studies, or any number of pitfalls. So a real discussion does not end with my assertion it can go on from there and the observer can conclude for themselves.

                      To simply call a challenge to that a logical fallacy is specious.

                      Personal attacks don’t work with me. I am immune to internet iocaine. My point was generally about analysis of published studies.

                      Then again this thread has become emotional with certain people destroying rational discussion and you had no possibility of one with the individual you were responding to so I am probably wasting my time.

                    5. I don’t think you’re wasting your time in reminding people of the subtle difference between ad hominem in cases like this versus tortured statistics caused by confirmation bias.

                      Your misstep was in not making it sufficiently clear that you weren’t rebutting Jesse’s point, but rather making a subtle point about levels of evidence based on probable bias of sources.

                      To pick an easy one: no one should believe anything bad that Rachel Maddow says about President Trump, not because she’s Rachel Maddow, but because she specifically has an extensive track record of being wrong about his administration specifically. But that doesn’t mean she’s wrong – just that she is so reliably wrong on that point that her making a claim is not only not evidence that it’s true, but probably weak evidence that it’s false.

                      Then again, how many people just skip any thread with Hihn in it?

                    6. no one should believe anything bad that Rachel Maddow says about President Trump, not because she’s Rachel Maddow, but because she specifically has an extensive track record of being wrong about his administration specifically

                      (smirk)

                  2. Mindless babble NO SUBSTANCE

                    Wikipedia is an authoritative source too!

                    Which ALSO proves JesseAz got suckered.

                    1. Oh Hihn. You can’t even discern sarcasm. Were you autistic before you became senile, or is it just a defect of intellect?

                    2. Hihn, always the ignorant one.

                    3. Well, Hihn’s stupidity wrecked the LP.

                    4. Hihn, you really should be pleased that “The Purge” is just a TV show.

              2. Cooked-book numbers here, as one would expect from JesseAZ. Wikipedia is pretty even-keel (not politically biased). If curious, go see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Center_for_Immigration_Studies

                1. Thanks! CIS is even crazier than I saw at that one link. 🙁

                  1. Hihn, how is it that you type so fast with socks on both hands?

                    1. LOSE ON THE MESSAGE … ATTACK THE MESSENGER .. FOR A TOTAL FUCKING STUPID REASON.

                      I now have a NEW STALKER.

                2. Wikipedia is pretty even-keel (not politically biased)

                  AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

                  Holy fucking shit Hihn.

                  1. Wikipedia is pretty even-keel (not politically biased)

                    AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
                    Holy fucking shit Hihn.

                    THIS is the bitch WHINING about ad hominems

                    For wikipedia, like anywhere else, sweaty — err sweetie — look to the sources and footnotes at the bottom of the page.
                    You’ll learn that in high school

                    1. You’ll learn that in high school

                      You aren’t allowed at any high school in America to use Wikipedia, or any other user-generated and unverified open platform, as a source Hihn. By way of comparison, it would be like when you went to high school, if you submitted your crayon drawings instead of referencing publications from the library.

                  2. Dumbass Donna. LIES ABOUT WHAT I SAID.

                    For wikipedia, like anywhere else, sweaty — err sweetie — look to the sources and footnotes at the bottom of the page.
                    You’ll learn that in high school

                    You aren’t allowed at any high school in America to use Wikipedia, or any other user-generated and unverified open platform, as a source Hihn

                    NON-RESPONSIVE .,.. COWARDLY DIVERSION … FOLLOWED BY A MASSIVE LIE.

                    You’ll learn that in high school

                    You aren’t allowed at any high school in America to use Wikipedia, or any other user-generated and unverified open platform, as a source Hihn

                    Here’s what I ACTUALLY said, PSYCHO STALKER

                    For wikipedia, like anywhere else, sweaty — err sweetie — look to the sources and footnotes at the bottom of the page. You’ll learn that in high school.

                    Hey, Chump, what better (or easier) way to find original sources?

                3. Ad hominem (Latin for “to the person”),[1] short for argumentum ad hominem, typically refers to a fallacious argumentative strategy whereby genuine discussion of the topic at hand is avoided by instead attacking the character, motive, or other attribute of the person making the argument, or persons associated with the argument, rather than attacking the substance of the argument itself.[2]

                  Wikipedia is an authoritative source too!

                  (Figured I might as well post it twice since you’re off your meds and replying to our own sockpuppet accounts that you’ve outed dozens of times)

                  1. DONNA SUMMER SETS A WORLD’S RECORD FOR STUPIDITY

                    donna Summer
                    Ad hominem (Latin for “to the person”),[1] short for argumentum ad hominem…

                    LOOKIE, LOOKIE, THE BITCH POSTS THAT DIRECTLY AFTER POSTING … AN AD HOMINEM.

                    FOLLOWED BY ANOTHER AD HOMINEM!! 🙂 🙂 🙂

                    (Figured I might as well post it twice since you’re off your meds and replying to our own sockpuppet accounts that you’ve outed dozens of times)

                    PSSST, LOSERS ALSO POST CRAZED CONSPIRACY THEORIES …. ANYTHING TO AVOID ANY REAL ISSUES!

                    (pees pants laughing)

                    1. LOOKIE LOOKIE HIHN THE SENILE DEMENTIA PATIENT CAN’T CLOSE A BLOCKQUOTE PROPERLY AND HAS NO IDEA WHAT AD HOMINEM MEANS EVEN THOUGH THE DEFINITION IS LITERALLY IN THE POST HE REPLIED TO

                      Poor Hihn.

                    2. DONNA SUMMER SETS A WORLD’S RECORD FOR STUPIDITY

                      You, Hihn, hold an unbroken record for stupidity, at least on this site. I mean, there is nobody even close.

                    3. LOOKIE LOOKIE … Donna Summer PROVEN a liar.
                      Compared with me not closing a blockquote. (lol)

                      HAS NO IDEA WHAT AD HOMINEM MEANS EVEN THOUGH THE DEFINITION IS LITERALLY IN THE POST HE REPLIED TO

                      (smirk) Yours *IS* an ad hominem, psycho.

                      … since you’re off your meds and replying to our own sockpuppet accounts that you’ve outed dozens of times.

                      Now a TWICE-PROVEN LIAR!

                      (Damn, I hope my punctuation is okay)

                    4. “(pees pants laughing)”

                      The nice nurse at the facility said laughing has nothing to do with it, just a natural result of your senility.

                  2. Just to add again. Excluding analysis because of bias concerns is not a fallacy. It does not disprove the assertion it questions the reliability of the source.

                    Say I were doing a meta-analysis of the effects of drug A on cardiac function. In reviewing the literature I find a study which was funded by the manufacturer of drug A. It is not ad hominem to exclude the study due to potential bias.

                    1. Echo, you have yet to actually refute the study with actual facts. Why are you so ignorant? If it was so easy you would have done so

                    2. WHOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOSH

                      He doesn’t have to, since your source is explicitly biased.
                      It’s YOUR job to prove a point, and you failed.

                    3. That would, in fact, be ad hominem. You’re distrusting the study because of the author, not because of the study design itself.

                      Of course in pharma that’s not the problem – the studies tend to be very well (or very narrowly) constructed. The problem is all of the studies that weren’t published, or were published in such a way as to effectively hide them.

                      What you should do, and what every reputable researcher does, is to classify researchers, laboratories, and funders based on their track record of agreement with post approval results. Then when you get a multimodal distribution of results you have a quantifiable basis on which to think suffered from a systemic flaw, regardless of the cause.

                4. Even sqrsly refuses to read the cited material. Is this how pathetic open border ideologues have become?

                  1. Even sqrsly refuses to read the cited material.

                    Didn’t have to. He destroyed it,

                    Is this how pathetic you alt-right ideologues have become.

            1. Immigrants have lower rates of incarceration and welfare than native Americans.

              Once again you repeat the common progtard deception of lumping legal and criminal immigrants into the same statistic. It’s wilful dishonesty, but, then again, no one expects better from you.

        2. On health care, we once provided universal treatment to the uninsured, regardless of age or income … until Medicare/Medicaid … with charity hospitals financed by thousands of PRIVATE and/or religious charities, foundations, fraternals and other organizations.

          That you don’t know any of this shows the failure of fiscal conservatism, including libertarians, for over a quarter century. Today, Lady Liberty is in the center of the ring, taking repeated blows to her head and body, with NOBODY defending or promoting her.

          1. OOPS. that was a response to OBL immediately below, at November.17.2019 at 9:03 am

            1. Another lie

              WHAT IS? BE SPECIFIC, SO YOU CAN BE RIDICULED AGAIN.

              1. PROVE IT FOR ONCE, JesseAz

                1. Hihn, you’re not worth the time sweetie.

              2. You call lashing out with ignorant fallacies as ridicule? Lol. Let me laugh harder at you.

                1. GIVE AN EXAMPLE, CHUMP.

            2. “ On health care, we once provided universal treatment to the uninsured, regardless of age or income … until Medicare/Medicaid … with charity hospitals financed by thousands of PRIVATE and/or religious charities, foundations, fraternals and other organizations.”

              True. We had several in Cleveland, and Catholic hospitals that would offer reduced costs to those unable to afford them. Sadly, most are gone, overtaken by chains with lower overhead, who can more readily comply with government regulations. Yes, government was a major factor in their demise.

              1. Close, but no balloon. 🙂

                We had several in Cleveland, and Catholic hospitals that would offer reduced costs to those unable to afford them.

                Like Saint Vincent’s Charity Hospital, on East 22nd. Also hospitals, like Lutheran on West 25th (where I was born) which did not have Charity in their name.

                Just to clarify, they ALL provided care. at whatever the patient could afford, mostly free, because that’s a difficult question to ask. Both doctors, nurses and staff described how SOME would send a few bucks whenever they could, but were told to see that as a “donation” for some future patient.action to see

                Sadly, most are gone, overtaken by chains with lower overhead, who can more readily comply with government regulations.

                St Vincent and Lutheran are still there, Lutheran part of Cleveland Clinic, but they were always among the very smallest,.

                No balloon :-), because they were destroyed by Medicaid. Why would anyone continue donating, when government said they’s pay for it.?

                Switching to pro-liberty vs anti-gummint, that’s why REAL libertarians have ALWAYS favored a slow transition back to the private sector, because the charity infrastructure must be rebuilt. Tax CREDITS for donations are the easiest to explain, and transfer the cash at the exact pace needed,

                That’s too complex for today’s goobers, like Rand Paul, which is why progressives are kicking our ass on health care.

      2. For any black and brown bodies entering this country, I support race-based affirmative action policies. I might also support Medicare for All if a Cato or Reason study suggests the US can attract more immigrants by offering them free healthcare.

        #LibertariansForBigGovernment
        #(AsLongAsItBenefitsImmigrants)

        1. Shouldn’t we give undocumented Americans reparations, just like African Americans?

          #neilibertarianism

    2. wow, then you are quite the intellectual dilettante

      1. His posts are so obvious parody it’s amazing that anyone is taking it seriouly

        1. Says the PROUD White Nationalist.

          1. You’re going to die in your Medicare-funded old age facility Hihn you decrepit worthless piece of welfare leeching subhuman shit. Do the world a favor and kill yourself. You know it’s the right thing.

            1. THIS IS THE SAME BITCH WHO WHINED … TWICE … ABOUT AD HOMINEMS .. BOTH WHILE POSTING AD HOMINEMS!

              NOW THE RETARD LAUNCHES ANOTHER AD HOMINEM … with the same self-righteous arrogance.

              **THIS IS NOT AN AD HOMINEM. BECAUSE I SHALL NOW SHOW HE/SHE IS A BAT-SHIT CRAZY PSYCHO

              The term hegemony is today often used as shorthand to describe the relatively dominant position of a particular set of ideas and their associated tendency to become commonsensical and intuitive, thereby inhibiting the dissemination or even the articulation of alternative ideas.
              https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/hegemony

              As in White Nationalism!

              (smirk)

              1. NOW THE RETARD LAUNCHES ANOTHER AD HOMINEM

                To have an “argumentum ad hominem” one needs to have an “argumentum”. Since that’s not possible with you, it can’t be an “ad hominem”. In fact, he simply launched a personal attack, one that you deserve in spades.

                1. TOTAL DUMBFUCK IS *PROUD* TO BE A BULLY.

                  In fact, he simply launched a personal attack, one that you deserve in spades.

                  Unprovoked personal attacks are NEVER justified … except to bullies and thugs and only a psycho would claim otherwise .. while launching an unprovoked assault,

                  AND SHE IS NOT A HE … WHICH IS ALSO A SUPPORTED ARGUMENT FOR ANOTHER OF YOUR FUCKUPS.

                  1. Unprovoked personal attacks are NEVER justified

                    I agree. But personal attacks on you are not unprovoked.

                    1. Not unprovoked? Hell, they’re BEGGED for.

                      Add me to your enemies list Hihn.

          2. You mean a PROUD White Nationalist like Mike Hihn?

            1. (In case you were wondering, that was sarcasm: I was merely repeating Hihn’s baseless accusations against others back to him. I don’t think Hihn is capable of any consistent ideological position at all anymore.)

              1. Hey, Dumbass! *I* provided a FUCKING DEFINITION … with a link to the source.

                HOW FUCKING PSYCHO CAN YOU PEOPLE BE … IN A SINGLE THREAD?

                1. HOW FUCKING PSYCHO CAN YOU PEOPLE BE … IN A SINGLE THREAD?

                  Nobody can reach your level.

                  1. Oh, I dunno. Charles Manson was a thing.

  4. Why shouldn’t democrats pursue positive rights? Their centrally controlled planning always works. See the success of project housing in large cities, the excellence in public education, etc. Have you ever been to a large city and not seen happiness and wealth wherever you walked?!?

    1. That’s because the political right is just as useless — but sucking up to a different tribe. And libertarians NOW have no policy solutions, for anything, in decades.

      Keep reciting your memorized slogans — the “Newspeak” mind control, as predicted by George Orwell in 1984

      1. At least spend more than one sentence replying to the persons actual comment before you try spinning it back to your broken record.

        Weren’t you a libertarian politician? Why aren’t you proposing policy solutions somewhere?

        Because no one liked you? Oh…makes sense

        1. (Posted in self-defense of mindless aggression)
          You admit libertarians have NO policy solutions, for ANYTHING!!!
          And whine a lot. PROVES MY POINT!

          Why aren’t you proposing policy solutions somewhere?

          (smirk)
          These were in the mid-90s, Skipper. Reason REFUSED to publish them.

          YOU TELL ME WHAT’S NOT TO PUBLISH .. AND WHY.
          As compared with …. not one fucking thing.
          PROOF of what I say, puppet-on-a-string. I set the bait, and caught a troll!

          Or …. what CONFUSES you, in my teardowns of
          1) Dick Armey’s Free Lunch (flat tax)

          2) Dick Armey’s REVISED Free Lunch.

          3) Cato’s Max Tax FUCKS UP taxable vs gross income — by STEVE MOORE, nominated by Trump the Fed. OMFG

          4) GOP Tax Quacks — DOCUMENTED stupidity, Reagan’s tax cuts, and WHY any single tax, on income or consumption would be a MASSIVE middle-class tax increase (Now an even bigger tax increase)

          5) MIDDLE-CLASS TAX LOOPHOLES … now much larger … where YOUR slogan-mongering assholes have allowed progressive to kick our ass for decades. The whole inequality scam. The middle-class pays higher tax rates than millionaires and billionaires … HOW MUCH OF THIS MENTAL RETARDATION HAVE YOU SWALLOWED? (sneer)

          ALL DOCUMENTED WITH OFFICIAL DATA.

          And DETAILED proposals: Reinventing Federalism + Liberty Issues Tax Plan.

          Compared with … NOTHING.

          At least spend more than one sentence replying to the persons actual comment before you try spinning it back to your broken record.

          Some of us count sentences. Some of us THINK.
          What I “spun” proves my point. DUH. And I have challenged you to prove yours, or admit I made a monkey out of you.

          Anything else, LOSER?

          1. Dick Armey’s Free Lunch (flat tax)

            How is a flat tax – same % for all taxpayers – a free lunch?

            If so, isn’t everything for sale on Amazon or anywhere a free lunch?

            These are the type of non sequitors that cause people to ignore and abuse you. AND THE SHOUTING.

            1. Big T sets a new low for SELF-RIGHTEOUS ASS-HOLERY!!!
              WATCH ME NAIL HIS TOTAL FUCKUP!!!

              Dick Armey’s Free Lunch (flat tax)

              How is a flat tax – same % for all taxpayers – a free lunch?

              He LIED about the cost … as first claimed by me…. and ….. hahahaha … HE LATER REVISED IT!!!

              http://www.libertyissues.com/lunch2.htm
              “Armey concedes his critics (including me) were right, by admitting his new bill will increase the deficit by $40 billion per year – despite his now-smaller tax cuts!

              FULLY DOCUMENTED BY LINKS AS THE SOURCE

              So your entire question … and premise … .is a MASSIVE FUCKUP … YET ANOTHER UNPROVOKED ASSAULT,

              If so, isn’t everything for sale on Amazon or anywhere a free lunch?

              1) STUPID QUESTION
              2) AMAZON (OR ANYWHERE) PAYS THE FULL COST

              NOW THE ASSHOLE OF THE MONTH .

              These are the type of non sequitors that cause people to ignore and abuse you. AND THE SHOUTING.

              1) You ADMIT your ignorance of the topic
              2) YOU DECLINED TO READ THE REPORT
              3) FUCKED UP WHAT IT MEANT
              4) BECAME A SELF-RIGHTEOUS … WHINER … WHILE MAKING A TOTAL PUBLIC ASS OF YOURSELF!!!!
              5) AND DON’T EVEN KNOW WHAT “NON-SEQUITUR” MEANS!

              WHAT A GUY!

              AND THE SHOUTING

              MY SHOUTING IS JUSTIFIED. YOURS JUST ADDS TO YOUR SELF-HUMILIATION!!!!

              Democrats borrow trillions, to pay for free stuff.
              Republicans borrow trillions to pay for free tax cuts.

              That’s WHY Trump is ALREADY the worst President on deficits EVER, despite inherited the longest recovery EVER for an incoming President … FROM OBAMA

              Even Rand Paul — faux libertarian — shut down the government (briefly), in a FAILED attempt to cut higher spending … CLAIMING a concern for deficits … then voted FOR tax cuts with WORSE deficit impact.

              He, like the GOP goobers, says that means “keeping more of my own money!” HOW FUCKING STUPID IS THAT????

              Today’s fiscally conservative FRAUDS … have NO FUCKING CLUE THAT THEY’RE STEALING FROM THEIR OWN CHILDREN!!! WTF???

              Will Big T now be like all the others … stalking me down the page with MORE unprovoked assaults … because THIS assault EXPLODED ALL OVER HIS PUSS? And self-righteously, of course. 🙂

              ***AN ADULT WOULD APOLOGIZE. DON’T HOLD YOUR BREATH

        2. As a general rule, Libertarian policy proposals amount to “stop sticking your dick in the hornet’s nest”. The reaction to this is to criticize the Libertarian policy proposal on the grounds that it doesn’t address the questions of which body parts we should be sticking in the hornet’s nest and where we should be sticking our dicks if not in the hornet’s nest.

          1. Quite good n the actual policies. But WAY off on the criticism, which suggests you have no idea what a “policy proposal” is.

            Policy proposals include HOW to achieve a stated goal, and how it will affect voters, a way that can be sold to voters. “Git gummint out” is tribal jargon, bellowing to the tribe..

            Since there are virtually no libertarians here, NOBODY cites a single proposal by the libertarian establishment — there are several, but they all play to the goober mentality and make no sense at all.

            Cato’s are downright crazy.

            Mercatus is the source for Nick Gillespie’s INSANE claim that 50+% cuts in federal spending were the “stimulus” for the Postwar Boom. Hysterically, the great god of progressivism, Paul Krugman, says the Postar Boom, was triggered by massive wartime deficit spending, DESPITE 91% tax rates postwar.

            See it?

            The 50% spending cuts and 91% tax rates were real. NOW do you see it? 🙂

            Gillespie, the libertarian, says we had a massive economic boom … with 91% tax rates. (Based on MASSIVELY fraudulent data from Mercatus)
            Krugman, the progressive says we had a massive boom … following huge spending CUTS!!

            Left – Right = Zero
            BOTH brainwashing their own mindless puppets (who swallow anything, anything at all.)

              1. Sevo
                Fuck off and die,

                1. You are boring, and an asshole.

            1. How about “stick to the constitution as written and leave me the hell alone.”?

              1. 1) You go first (smirk).
                2) Why were you called TOTALLY WRONG — AN AUTHORITARIAN, BY … Thomas Jefferson???

      2. You’re bad at logic Hihn.

        1. You’re bad at logic Hihn.

          I challenge you AGAIN. Be specific, not a whiny pussy … so you can be humiliate, like the last time I called you out

          THIS is what JFree says is bad logic (smirk)
          https://reason.com/2019/11/17/democrats-are-conjuring-up-new-rights/#comment-8015437

          1. And this is where JFree humiliated himself, when his OTHER lie was called out (and ridiculed)
            https://reason.com/2019/11/17/democrats-are-conjuring-up-new-rights/#comment-8015548

            STOP STALKING ME.

            1. You’re not even referencing the right person. It is JesseAz you’re responding to and you mention Jfree?

              1. Equally stoopid.

                JesseAz … called out …, FAILS to support. So they’re equals in both bullshit and cowardice

                Anything else?

                1. Anything else?

                  Your senile dementia is to a stage where you can’t even differentiate between different people anymore Hihn. You have no family. You have no friends. You are universally loathed and despised by everyone including your caretakers who would leave you to die if not for the taxpayer-funded checks they cash to take care of you. Do the dignified thing for once in your life and eat a shotgun slug.

                  1. DO A PAGE SEARCH FOR THIS PSYCHO BITCH’S NAME.

                    SHE KEEPS WHINING LIKE A PUSSY ABOUT … AD HOMINEMS … WHILE STALKING ME DOWN THE PAGE POSTING AD HOMINEMS!

                    Typical self-righteous arrogance of his/her ilk
                    Pity them, for they have no life.

                    1. Do a page search for Donna Summers? No one is stalking you since you’ve posted on just about every comment in this thread. No one else can have a conversation because you are shit posting on everyone’s comment.

                    2. PAY ATTENTION GOOBER.

                      MY COMMENTS ARE NOT AD HOMINEMS
                      YOURS IS!

                      you are shit posting on everyone’s comment.

                      ANOTHER COWARDLY DIVERSION.
                      (SNEER)

                  2. 2oz of birdshot, #7 or higher, is more effective for self administration than a slug, especially if eaten. A slug is more likely to go straight through and miss anything vital, while a heavy load of birdshot will slow just enough to build up pressure inside the cavity before the rest of the powder blows out the rest.

                    You can test this with watermelons. Shorter barrels work better too.

                    Of course I still think Hihn is just a bot farm in Russia, so we could just unplug him.

                2. Hihn.. you’re losing it dear.

                  1. JesseAz … called out …, FAILS to support.

                    hihn.. you’re losing it dear.

                    ANOTHER FAIL!
                    Another Cowardly Evasion.

          2. Hihn sweetie… you’re bad at logic.

        2. PROVE IT FOR ONCE, JesseAz
          You have THREE cowardly evasions (so far)

          1. ANOTHER COWARDLY EVASION

  5. Funny how each newly discovered right requires an immense government bureaucracy to implement it by taking away even more actual rights from more citizens than get the new right.
    Well, ok, maybe not so funny.

    Welcome to the revolution.

  6. Alternatively, the Dems realize Trump already has 2020 in the bag. The ones with a lick of sense are preparing for 2024 and have left the field to the lunatic fringe. The natural media focus on the bizarre, the strange, the outrageous and the outliers makes it seem as though “everybody” is in agreement on all this hardcore Marxist bullshit, but it’s really just a few of the nuttiest fruitcakes.

    1. That’s what I think. I doubt we can project any long term trends from this presidential election. Let’s look at 2020’s Congressional and state legislative elections to see what Democrats really consider winning ideas.

  7. Rights–of all kinds–are the obligation to respect other people’s choices.

    You are obligated not to smash me in the head with a hammer against my will, but you are not obligated to respect the choices of rocks–because rocks can’t make choices. Because I can make choices, you are obligated to respect my right to make them for myself. Because rocks can’t make choices, they have no rights.

    Property rights are just like other rights in that regard. When I say my smartphone belongs to me, it means I’m the one that gets to decide when it’s used, how it’s used, if it’s used, etc. Everyone else is obligated to respect my choices, too–so long as I don’t use my phone to violate my obligation to respect someone else’s rights.

    Every definition of “rights” that isn’t grounded in the obligation to respect choices is fundamentally wrong. Referring to a wastewater treatment facility as a public swimming pool doesn’t make it safe for children to swim in it.

    1. “Every definition of “rights” that isn’t grounded in the obligation to respect choices is fundamentally wrong.”

      No. Rights require no recognition, participation, or assent. Rights are that which one may do as of natural course, and when opposed may properly be defended.

      It is wise to respect others rights precisely because of the harm that may befall you should you not. That harm being both directly from the injured party and indirectly through the harm or denigration inflicted upon your own rights.

      1. “No. Rights require no recognition, participation, or assent.”

        When I say that we’re all obligated to respect each other’s choices and that this obligation originates from agency itself, I am saying that the existence of our rights doesn’t require anything more than our ability to make choices.

        Whether it’s wise or foolish to respect other’s rights may be an open question, but we’re all obligated to respect each other’s rights regardless of whether violating someone’s rights is in someone else’s best interests anyway.

        Maybe I should add that ethics itself only exists within the realm of choice. To say an action is unethical is to say that someone should have chosen to do otherwise. Moral obligations and rights are different sides of the same coin–and they both originate from agency.

        1. So, non choosing fetuses and infants and mentally handicapped have no rights?

          You need to refine your definition a bit. Human beings have rights by their being human.

          1. All that does is shift part of the argument to be about what’s a human. This is the argument if many extremists – a new human is created only after its detached from the hosts body. As long as it’s still attached it’s not yet it’s own entity, and is simply a growth on the host, who can dispose of it however they please, like nail clippings.

            That’s how you get states allowing 40 week gestational age babies to be extracted through the vaginal canal, and then chopped up with shears to better harvest the organs while it screams. As long as the woman desires that unwanted growth to be destroyed, then if the line for “human” is at disconnection from the host then no actions were ever taken against a human.

            So moving the line to “human” doesn’t solve anything, it just shifts the argument.

            1. MORE HYSTERIA BY BECKMAN!!!
              NOBODY says his bullshit about a fetus.
              And his other hysteria is … laughably false

              FACT: All humans have FULL RIGHTS at conception,
              I defend that. . Beckman SHITS on it –claims the mother LOSES her rights … somehow … for how long??? … on what authority??

              ALL unalienable rights are precisely equal … BY DEFINITION.
              That means …. THINK … the fetal child’s unalienable Right to Life is PRECISELY equal to the woman’s unalienable Right To Liberty … EXCEPT to those who DENY the Will of Almighty God.

              (Constitutionally, else gummint could claim one right as justifying the denial of another. Full stop),

              To those brainwashed by the anti-Christ, they have been taught to say . the woman chose to surrender her rights by choosing to have sex … because sex is the sole purpose of procreation.
              GOD’S WILL SAYS, “ONLY FOR THE LOWER ANIMALS, NOT HUMANS.”

              Huh? Ninth Grade biology. Lower animals CANNOT have sex, unless they’re in heat … HUMAN WOMEN DON’T GO INTO HEAT!!!!

              By the will of Almighty God, human’s receive the same the same joy/satisfaction from sex, even if procreation is IMPOSSIBLE.

              Did God screw up? Or did He CREATE US TO HAVE SEX SOLELY FOR PERSONAL PLEASURE????

              P.S. That video, about Planned Parenthood harvesting fetal organs for profit … THE ONE WHERE THE WORDS ON THE RIGHT DID NOT MATCH THE AUDIO WORDS …

              Planned Parenthood was awarded as much as $2.2 million< in damages on Friday, after a federal jury in San Francisco ruled that an anti-abortion activist had broken federal and state laws when he secretly recorded workers for the organization.

              The activist, David R. Daleiden, recorded the videos in 2015 in an attempt to show that Planned Parenthood was illegally selling fetal tissue, a claim that created a political uproar and mobilized conservatives against the organization.

              Mr. Daleiden’s supporters argued that the case was about freedom of speech. Mr. Daleiden was working, effectively, as an undercover journalist, they said, and should be protected by the First Amendment.

              FIRST AMENDMENT DOES NOT INCLUDE FRAUD … EXCEPT TO PROGTARDS! (lol)

  8. As long as some people are too dumb to realize that the “They” who will eventually pay for this will be them, Democrats will keep selling it.

    1. And YOUR children and grandkids will suffer AND PAY FOR. Trump’s MASSIVE Debt … and they never had a vote on it.

  9. “Here’s a tough thing to talk about, though we must,” O’Rourke said. “Rich people are going to have to allow, or be forced to allow, lower-income people to live near them….We force lower-income, working Americans to drive one, two, three hours in either direction to get to their jobs, very often minimum wage jobs.”

    Back in the 1970s, there was this thing called “white flight”. It coincided with the end of segregation. Much of it was driven by white people not wanting their kids to attend public schools with the underprivileged children of the inner cities. White people fled the cities and moved to the suburbs, which had de facto segregation. If your kids were only going to school with other kids whose parents could afford to move to the suburbs, then they were attending a school with few minorities.

    Liberals tried to fight this trend in the 1970s with “busing”.
    This especially impacted whites who couldn’t afford to leave the city behind–and accelerated the white flight trend. Busing was basically forced integration. If you live in a white community and you don’t have enough minorities in your district to be sufficiently diverse, they’d just assign your kid to a school in a heavily black neighborhood, bus you over there, and they’d bus a black kid to your white school in your place–and that way they’ll achieve diversity!

    Whether it’s racist not to want your kid sent to a school full of underprivileged minorities may be an open question for some, but the people who went bonkers over busing weren’t in the South. They were white liberals in places like Boston.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boston_desegregation_busing_crisis

    Nowadays, we’re seeing the same white flight trend–and for the same reasons. When Millennials get married and have kids, they flee the diversity of the urban environment and head to suburbs, and when they talk about what they’re looking for in a home, the top priority they cite is often the schools. Is it really hard to believe that parents would prefer not to send their kids to schools impacted by gangs, drugs, and other problems that the parents of underprivileged kids in urban neighborhoods are trying to escape, too? I’m not here to speak to that.

    What I will point out is that the Millennial+ rationalizations for their white flight behavior are mostly hogwash. They imagine that their white flight parents and grandparents were racists because they were fleeing integration, but what they don’t realize is that plenty of their white flights parents and grandparents were aesthetically liberal, too–right up until the moment the government tried to force them to send their kids to integrated schools. Then it literally became Escape from New York, a movie about the results of white flight going so far that the government just walls off the city and uses it as an open air prison.

    Plenty of white flight parents abhorred racism. People are complicated! White flight parents would tune in to watch Archie Bunker in the ’70s like other liberals today tune in to watch Eric Cartman. They’d laugh at the stupidity of his racism–even as they were fleeing desegregation. They’re really no different from the Millenials+ of today, who suddenly realize they need to move when they check out where their kid is about to attend first grade. Of course they condemn racism–just like their white flight parents and grandparents did–but if O’Rourke thinks that means Millenials will react differently to forced integration now than the white flight generation did, he’s nuts.

    That’s partly why a guy like Ronald Reagan took the country by storm. Thatcher said that the problem with socialism is that they always run out of other people’s money to spend. Reagan might have said they always run out of other people’s children to reform. Integration! That’s something that’s supposed to happen to rednecks, not the liberals of Boston! Massachusetts and New York voted for Ronald Reagan in both 1980 and 1984–for these and other similar reasons. This is how liberal young people turn into conservatives. People aren’t about to let their principles get in the way of what they think is best for themselves and their children–whether they’re Millennial, Boomers, or the Athenians who went after Socrates. Forced integration is for rednecks. Bring it to liberal places like Boston, and you’ll see liberal places like Boston go Republican again.

    1. P,S. Look at all the liberals caught up in the college admissions scandal. That’s what happens to progressive principles when the focus stops being about whether the government should force rednecks to do things against their will and starts impacting their own lives.

      1. Where’s the Rev K to tell us about our “betters”?

        1. Any libertarian would do likewise. And laugh at the conservatards who see only what they want to see.

          Because Left – Right = Zero. Thugs to the left of us. Thugs to the right of us. Both less than 40% combined, and shrinking.

          1. So if one accepts all that, why did you work so hard to destroy the LP and ruin it’s credibility?

            1. That’s crazy bullsit … but not TOTALLY INSANE as you were here:

              https://reason.com/2019/11/17/democrats-are-conjuring-up-new-rights/#comment-8016640

    2. Back in the 1970s, there was this thing called “white flight”.

      That was the 50s.

      It coincided with the end of segregation.

      THAT was the 50s.

      The famous faceoff in Little Rock, Arkansas was 1957. Governor Faubus activated his state militia, armed force to stop nine kids from registering at their Central High School.

      Eisenhower sent troops, authorized to use force if necessary, to defend the equal rights of nine schoolkids,

      Faubus collapsed, later saying he was defending the voters of Arkansas from an over-reaching Supreme Court … the KKK-version of states rights falsely labeled as “federalism” … a southern racist tracing to Jim Crow … falsely labeled today by Ron Paul, to the same redneck bigots (but now adding homosexuals)

      1. You are dumb, and boring, and an asshole.

        1. (boldface in defense of unprovoked aggression by an apparent right-wing THUG)

          Says the proud-to-be-Colossal Douchebag … who HATES actual historical facts versus bellowing and blustering. The Authoritarian Right, STILL censoring and burning books. (shudder)

          P.S. It has always been the JOB of SCOTUS to defend individual rights, as a check on abuses by the other two branches. Accept it. Or leave.

          1. P.S. It has always been the JOB of SCOTUS to defend individual rights, as a check on abuses by the other two branches. Accept it. Or leave.</blockquote

            Hey Hihn, aren't you the senile imbecilic worthless obsolete piece of subhuman shit who says that we should have gun confiscation even though the SCOTUS has ruled that there is an individual right to own firearms? Why don't you exercise that right and blow your head off with a 10 gauge shotgun slug through the base of your skull?

            1. You will continue posting lies and childish as hominems.
              I shall continue posts FACTS … WITH SOURCES

              Hey Hihn, aren’t you the senile imbecilic worthless obsolete piece of subhuman shit who says that we should have gun confiscation

              Never, sicko.

              even though the SCOTUS has ruled that there is an individual right to own firearms?

              ONLY the modern equivalent of weapons in common use at our founding brought from home for militia service …. since 1939, goober (smirk)

              That’s WHY the NRA was totally helpless against the 1994 “Assault Weapons Ban … for 10 long years. It could ONLY be repealed or expire … since 1939,

              SCALIA says you’re full of shit … ON THIS ALSO!!

              Scalia(re Heller) . Page 2
              https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/07pdf/07-290.pdf

              2. Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues…

              Miller’s holding (1939) that the sorts of weapons protected are those “in common use at the time” finds support in the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons. Pp. 54–56.
              ((Pages 54-56 are a VERY lengthy list of gun prohibitions at and around ratification. Scalia was an originalist; NOBODY here, who opposes any and all regulations is.

              DC v Heller p 114

              The second independent reason is that the protection the Amendment provides is not absolute. The Amendment permits government to regulate the interests that it serves

              ===.

              “It may be objected that if weapons that are most useful in military service—M-16 rifles and the like—may be banned, then the Second Amendment right is completely detached from the prefatory clause.”

              **That’s the issue, goobers, the militia clause.

              But as we have said, the conception of the militia at the time of the Second Amendment’s ratification was the body of all citizens capable of military service, who would bring the sorts of lawful weapons that they possessed at home to militia duty.

              Weapons in common use in the 1800s. Miller and Heller, both page 1.

              It may well be true today that a militia, to be as effective as militias in the 18th century, would require sophisticated arms that are highly unusual in society at large.

              PERHAPS only more sophisticated weapons can be as EFFECTIVE. AND

              Indeed, it may be true that no amount of small arms could be useful against modern-day bombers and tanks.

              The modern equivalent of a musket may be USELESS against today’s bombers and tanks. BUT

              But the fact that modern developments have limited the degree of fit between the prefatory clause and the protected right cannot change our interpretation of the right.

              NONE of that can change how the right is interpreted (in Miller)

              Next … Miller … and what guntards LIE about (“at the time”)

              1. Cont’d
                US v Miller (1939)

                The Militia which the States were expected to maintain and train is set in contrast with Troops which they were forbidden to keep without the consent of Congress. The sentiment of the time strongly disfavored standing armies; the common view was that adequate defense of country and laws could be secured through the Militia — civilians primarily, soldiers on occasion.

                The signification attributed to the term Militia appears from the debates in the Convention, the history and legislation of Colonies and States, and the writings of approved commentators. These show plainly enough that the Militia comprised all males physically capable of acting in concert for the common defense. “A body of citizens enrolled for military discipline.” And further, that ordinarily, when called for service these men were expected to appear bearing arms supplied by themselves and of the kind in common use at the time.

                1) EXPLICITLY rejects military weapons …

                2 ) “these men” are the citizens militia at ratification Also confirmed (if needed) by “when called for service” for the 1800s militia.

                3) “common use at the time” …. all one sentence … the TIME PERIOD does not change in mid-sentence, so it’s “in common use” AT RATIFICATION.

                THIS is where guntards have been TOTALLY brainwashed .. that 2A protects all weapons “in common use NOW.” PROVEN here as bullshit, linked to actual rulings. But WATCH THEM WHINE ANYHOW! They’re as hopeless as Bernie’s and Elizabeth’s puppets.

                1. EXPLICITLY rejects military weapons

                  How is a militia composed of the body of the people trained to arms supposed to function if it does not have access to modern technology weapons? Or are you suggesting that a musket is/was not a military weapon?

                  1. CRAZY ASSHOLE TRIES TO OVERRULE 80 YEARS OF CONSTITUTIONAL PRECEDENT.

                    LYING SACK OF SHIT IGNORE THE VERY WORDS THAT ANSWER HIS OUT OF CONTEXT LUNACY

                    US v Miller (1939)

                    The Militia which the States were expected to maintain and train is set in contrast with Troops which they were forbidden to keep without the consent of Congress. The sentiment of the time strongly disfavored standing armies; the common view was that adequate defense of country and laws could be secured through the Militia — civilians primarily, soldiers on occasion.

                    The signification attributed to the term Militia appears from the debates in the Convention, the history and legislation of Colonies and States, and the writings of approved commentators. These show plainly enough that the Militia comprised all males physically capable of acting in concert for the common defense. “A body of citizens enrolled for military discipline.” And further, that ordinarily, when called for service these men were expected to appear bearing arms supplied by themselves and of the kind in common use at the time

                    .

                    1) EXPLICITLY rejects military weapons …

                    2 ) “these men” are the citizens militia at ratification Also confirmed (if needed) by “when called for service” for the 1800s militia.

                    3) “common use at the time” …. all one sentence … the TIME PERIOD does not change in mid-sentence, so it’s “in common use” AT RATIFICATION.

                    THIS is where guntards have been TOTALLY brainwashed .. that 2A protects all weapons “in common use NOW.” PROVEN here as bullshit, linked to actual rulings. But WATCH THEM WHINE ANYHOW! They’re as hopeless as Bernie’s and Elizabeth’s puppets.
                    ———————

                    HE JUST PULLED THE BULLSHIT, EXACTLY AS I PREDICTED.

                    How is a militia composed of the body of the people trained to arms supposed to function if it does not have access to modern technology weapons?

                    Modern at RATIFICATION, chump.
                    THANK YOU FOR CONFIRMING YOU ARE AS FULL OF SHIT AS I PREDICTED.

              2. Still on that retarded “taken out of context SCOTUS quote is the literal Word of God” schtick, huh? You’ve flogged that dead horse until there’s nothing but some bits of fur and bones scattered around you.

                Too old to continue your education I guess.

                1. Still on that retarded “taken out of context SCOTUS quote is the literal Word of God” schtick, huh?

                  1) It’s the Law of the Land.
                  2) The FULL context is just above. (sneer)
                  https://reason.com/2019/11/17/democrats-are-conjuring-up-new-rights/#comment-8015831

                  WHERE IS YOUR TEXT?

                  1. And libertarians are well-known for being big on the law of the land representing inerrant Word of God, huh?

                    Actually, I think you have this place confused with the Daily Worker, Comrade.

                    1. And libertarians are well-known for being big on the law of the land representing inerrant Word of God, huh?

                      And I RIDICULED your crazy notion …linked to PROOF that you’re full of shit.

                      Actually, I think you have this place confused with the Daily Worker, Comrade.

                      Because you’re too fucking stoopid to grasp what I described just above?

      2. If desegregation was in the 1950s why pray tell did we need the 1964 Civil Rights Act or the Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education decision in 1971?

        Jesus fucking Christ Hihn, you were a middle aged worthless piece of shit losing the election for Bumfuck County Dog Catcher in the 1970s on the Libertarian Party ticket, you should have some recollection of it. Has the dementia rotted your brain that far, or were you already in the early stages of it even then?

        1. MORE DUMBFUCKERY FROM THE TRUMPTARD RACISTS.

          If desegregation was in the 1950s why pray tell did we need the 1964 Civil Rights Act or the Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education decision in 1971?

          HOLY FUCK, DID YOU ATTEND HIGH SCHOOL?

          https://www.history.com/topics/black-history/brown-v-board-of-education-of-topeka
          Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka was a landmark 1954 Supreme Court case in which the justices ruled unanimously that racial segregation of children in public schools was unconstitutional.
          (sneer)

          Exposing his/her STUPIDITY continues

          1. Continued for Klansmen

            https://www.history.com/topics/black-history/civil-rights-act
            The Civil Rights Act of 1964, which ended segregation in public places and banned employment discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex or national origin.
            (pees my pants, laughing at the RACIST RETARD. ,

            MORE DUMBFUCKERY FOLLOWS

            1. (sneer)

              https://www.ncpedia.org/swann-v-charlotte-mecklenburg-board
              Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education,argued before the U.S. Supreme Court in 1971, established court-ordered busing of students as a constitutional means of desegregating public schools.The case originated in the combined Charlotte-Mecklenburg County school system in 1965, when attorney Julius L. Chambers filed suit on behalf of ten pairs of African American parents.

              1. TOTALLY OUT OF CONTROL … CONSUMED BY RAGING, PSYCHO, HATRED … THE AUTHORITARIAN RIGHT

                Jesus fucking Christ Hihn, you were a middle aged worthless piece of shit losing the election for Bumfuck County Dog Catcher in the 1970s on the Libertarian Party ticket, you should have some recollection of it. Has the dementia rotted your brain that far, or were you already in the early stages of it even then?

                Anyone surprised that this crazed Trumptard is SO TOTALLY FUCKING IGNORANT OF THESE MAJOR ADVANCES IN …., THE SAME EQUAL RIGHTS THAT TRUMPS SHITS ON?.

                Did ANYONE imagine they are so TOTALLY BRAINWASHED on race relations … ON TOP OF HIS/HER TOTAL ASSHOLERY ON CHARLOTTESVILLE?

                https://reason.com/2019/11/17/democrats-are-conjuring-up-new-rights/#comment-8015825

                THIS IS TRUMP’S CORE BASE … a SEVERE threat to EVERYONE’s liberties … and many more than this INSANE stalking cyber-bully.

                Verbal Aggressiveness …A personality trait that predisposes persons to attack the self-concepts of other people instead of, or in addition to, their positions on topics of communication … Verbal aggressiveness is thought to be mainly a destructive form of communication

                Verbal hostility, or in other words, verbal harassment or abuse is basically a negative defining statement told to or about you or withholding a response and pretending the abuse is not happening.

                Cyberbullying The act of bullying someone through electronic means (as by posting mean or threatening messages about the person online)

                Stalker A person who harasses or persecutes someone with unwanted and obsessive attention.

                psychopath A person suffering from chronic mental disorder with abnormal or violent social behaviour.
                -Authoritarian thugs, right and left.

                Left – Right = Zero

      3. I really wish everyone would get off the redneck bandwagon. Rednecks are the manual laborers. We can’t be bigots for the most part, because we WORK with black people and Mexicans. All those “uneducated” jobs are mostly held by the rednecks, the black people, and the Mexicans. It’s really hard to be much of a bigot when the guys you work with, rely on, are minorities.

        Bigotry, if you’ll notice, is mostly white suburban people. Not white trailer park people who have Mexicans in the trailer next to them. Most rednecks have bills to pay and jobs to do, WITH minorities…we ain’t got time for that shit. Suburban people are the ones with too much damn time on their hands to sit around thinking shit like that up. My grandmother may have used some of the words she grew up with, but she never treated her neighbors as less than her and was just as likely to help them as anyone else.

        Rednecks are usually the folks that CAN’T afford to run off and live in a white only neighborhood. We adapted, because we HAD to. The suburbanites didn’t, because they could participate in the great white flight.

        1. I watched Charlottesville. Those ASSHOLES were not high-tech workers, 🙂

          Now, if you mean it’s wrong to assume that all …. umm, redneck types … are bigots. THAT is what you might consider using — especially for online political forums, both left and right..

          Anyone does that to YOU is the bigot … by definition
          One definition is to apply negative stereotypes to any entire group or class..

    3. This is an excellent analysis. Thank you Ken.

      My addition would be that in my experience the political/cultural climate behaves like a pendulum. We’re approaching the end of the leftward swing and (hopefully) as they overreach and turn off more and more of their constituents we’ll see the momentum stop and swing the other way.
      The key to this paradigm is that we have built strong institutions in this country to ensure a peaceful momentum shift. These institutions are lacking in many other countries that experience violent changes in power as revolutionaries and reactionaries have few checks on their actions.

      1. “The key to this paradigm is that we have built strong institutions in this country to ensure a peaceful momentum shift.”

        It’s interesting that the parties themselves tend to be the instrument of the pendulum shift.

        “Reagan Democrats no longer saw the Democratic party as champions of their working class aspirations, but instead saw them as working primarily for the benefit of others: the very poor, feminists, the unemployed, African Americans, Latinos and other groups.”

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reagan_Democrat

        That could have been written about all the registered Democrats who crossed party lines to vote for Trump in the 2016 primaries, and put him in office, too.

        The establishment Democrats (like Pelosi) seem to understand that they can’t tell the voters–whose support they need to win–how much they hate them, but for the radical progressives in deep blue districts, hating average Americans for being white, blue collar, and middle class is what being progressive is all about. Those things are associated with racism, homophobia, xenophobia, etc., and hating average people for not caring more about minorities than they do about themselves is, in their imagination, the primary purpose of politics.

        As the costs of the progressives’ obsessions become increasingly clear to liberal minded voters, the allure of progressiveness will become increasingly unappealing. Everything is like that, whether we’re talking about the cost of climate change or the cost of Medicare for All. When the bills come due–that’s when the pendulum shifts. Forced integration is a lot like ObamaCare. People loved ObamaCare when they thought it was about no more preexisting condition exclusions and poor people finally getting the “free” healthcare they need! Once it became about how you don’t get to keep your doctor, your insurance premiums are doubling over the course of a few years, etc., suddenly it wasn’t so popular anymore.

        Yeah, desegregation was really popular–right up until it was their kids who were being bused across town into a school in a nasty neighborhood. That’s when then pendulum shifted. It’s basically like buyers’ remorse. That’s when we see who the real racists are.

        1. “Once it became about how you don’t get to keep your doctor, your insurance premiums are doubling over the course of a few years, etc., suddenly it wasn’t so popular anymore.”

          There are Christians out there who go along with the religion for cultural reasons: tradition, family, it’s a social gathering of families that have known each other for generations, etc. They don’t really believe that they have a guardian angel that follows them around wherever they go or the story about Jesus walking on water, but they believe in that stuff more than they believe in turning the other cheek, blessing those that curse them, or loving those that hate them. There are a lot of Christians like that, not all of them.

          There are a lot of liberals who claim to understand basic economics, but they never seem to understand why progressive programs fail so miserably when they fly in the face of basic economic thinking. Libertarians knew what would happen in Venezuela with Chavez, we knew what would happen with ObamaCare, and we know what will happen if Liz Warren bans fracking her first day in office and wins congressional approval for Medicare for All. Like a Christian who doesn’t really believe in Jesus’ miracles, however, they don’t really act like they believe in economics. Even worse, they don’t really believe in the stuff they say about illegal immigration, racism, etc. either. Some of them do, but for the most part, if it actually required them to do something differently, they’d keep their neighborhood the way it is and send their kids to the local school.

          Once it starts costing them something, their behavior shows that they never really had any progressive religion. They were progressive for social reasons or other reasons. It’s easy to be tolerant from the lily-white suburbs.

          1. P.S. I suspect the pendulum on illegal immigration shifted dramatically in southern California on this issue. On the one hand, plenty of women in Orange County, Riverside County, and San Diego County understood that they were paying through the nose for taxes and were willing to vote for Prop 187.

            On the other hand, when you’re talking about deporting all those illegal aliens, you don’t mean the ones that are cleaning our houses, watching our kids, and mowing our lawn, do you? Because whether we’re talking about working moms or not, they’re not about to do that shit themselves when they can hire an illegal alien to do it for them on the cheap.

            1. I have often questioned if it was really true that illegal immigrants actually work “ on the cheap”. It is certainly true that there is an overall wage gap because illegal immigrants take available lower paying jobs for a number of reasons however if you control for education and skill set is there really a difference?

              I did find this in which an economist found a difference of only 3.4% in 2014 when the other factors are controlled for. I have not found anything more recent.

              https://qz.com/939526/things-have-been-getting-better-for-americas-unauthorized-immigrants/

              I think most of the perception of “cheap labor” comes from the fact that there is a greater supply of illegal immigrants willing to take jobs that are already low paying.

              I have no hard data but it may very well be that the OC housewife doesn’t want her housekeeper deported more because she likes her housekeeper than because she is saving a few bucks.

              From personal experience, I know this sounds stereotypical, the guy who does my yard work is an immigrant, I assume legal but I don’t check anyone’s papers. Having gone through a number of contractors I hire him, he is actually a small company now, because by far he does the best job of any of the others. I pay him whatever he charges and it is the same as any of the rest excepting a few companies that were clearly overcharging over the going rate.

              1. That link you gave seems to be talking about employment of illegal aliens by corporations rather than by working mothers.

                “Only in 1986 did US lawmakers ban employers from knowingly hiring workers who were in the US illegally. That made unauthorized immigrants, in theory, riskier to hire—introducing extra costs that employers would share with their unauthorized hires by discounting their wages.”

                The working mothers of Orange County aren’t about to start filing W-2s on their nannies and housekeepers. Those are informal arrangements. Those housekeepers get hired to come clean on Mondays and Wednesdays because her best friend is using the same cleaning lady on Tuesdays and Thursdays. The lawn mowers go door to door asking for business.

                These work relationships between illegal aliens and the people who hire them are about as fluid as when people used to hire the kid down the street to mow the lawn or his sister to babysit. There are no taxes being paid on these workers. There is no SSI. No one needs to buy insurance. And the reason people can afford to use them is because they’re so cheap.

                Incidentally, it works the same way in Mexico, when I was there. Everybody knows somebody that cleans houses, etc., and almost everyone can afford to hire someone to do so because they work so cheap.

                1. Actually in those fields the same arrangements also occur for native born Americans. I have hired lots of them on informal arrangements like that. Just had a crew of Amish guys out to do some work. Here is your check at the end of the day. No questions asked. Same for housekeepers. You can often make more money in a cash economy irrespective of immigration status.

                  My question is do illegal immigrant independent housekeepers work for less than native Americans doing the same thing. Don’t know the evidence for that. The second thing is does the housewife hire one over the other based more on cost or quality? Both probably.

                  You hired housekeepers in Mexico because they work for low cost so worth it for you rather than doing it yourself. Nothing to do with legal status.

                  If we believe the article it indicates that overall illegals make slightly less correcting for skills an education. It seems that while they are “cheap labor” in the sense that they are taking low paying jobs they are not overall paid at a significantly lower rate than anyone else for the same work.

                  While there has always been a cash economy which warms my libertarian heart, I believe that many of these people would take regular payroll jobs if they could.

                  1. Echo, why are you trying to argue when you simply commit fallacy after fallacy?

                    1. Sue me Jesse for commitment of fallacy. Which ones?

                      Cmon I am trying here. You and I do not agree and never will. I am fine with that it is how things work. Go ahead and promote your point.

                      Thus far I get “ignorant asshole” and “fallacy after fallacy” yet you have not even stated a clear hypothesis. I have not contested your belief in this matter whatever it is.

                      Do want a discussion or not.

                      Here is a start from the article you linked.

                      “The Superiority of SIPP Data. An extensive analysis comparing administrative data to eight different government surveys, including the ACS and ASEC, conducted for the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) concluded that the “SIPP performs much better than other surveys in identifying program participants.” By interviewing respondents multiple times during the year, and focusing on welfare programs, the same analysis found “that SIPP’s approach is clearly effective for program participation” and that “SIPP estimates exceed those of other surveys by a wide margin.”8

                      Bold words there “extensive” “Superior” “administrative data” “eight different government surveys” “clearly effective for program participation”

                      The article excludes any data outside of those performed by a small group of analysts employed by the census bureau. It proclaims that the analysis is superior as supported by HHS statement.

                      Statistical observation lacks independent analysis and data collection. It is based on self reported survey of around 3000 individuals without peer review or reported biases or methodology. It is a weak study without strong control groups and weak statistical power. The authors are not named nor are their affiliations.

                      Now none of that disproves anything. I don’t take the HHS for their word. Just me ya know.

                  2. Just to add. People often throw around terms like cheap labor and unskilled labor in a disparaging way. They do so while munching down on that drive through chicken sandwich without a second thought as to what it took to get it in that paper bag.

                    The other thing is there is no real indicator of what skills these people may have because they are prohibited by occupational licensing and work laws. Even those with little formal education may be skilled carpenters, plumbers, mechanics, hairdressers, or craftsmen of various kinds but are stuck picking pears in Oregon.

                    1. I have nothing but respect for people who work hard for a living, and I think the primary benefit of immigrant labor is that it’s so inexpensive.

                    2. Ok tell me that the primary benefit of the person who got my order together at chick-fil-a today and was so nice and did a great job is that she is so inexpensive.

                      Then the discussion goes to a different level.

        2. Condescending and pandering racists are my favorite type of bitter prog clingers, as their hypocritical ideology falls down all around them and they are replaced by their betters, who see people as individuals, not an identity group to be mined for grievance.

          Haha.

      2. My addition would be that in my experience the political/cultural climate behaves like a pendulum. We’re approaching the end of the leftward swing and (hopefully) as they overreach and turn off more and more of their constituents we’ll see the momentum stop and swing the other way.

        Trump is disrupting this cyclic pattern. His boorishness is making ‘conservatism’ less attractive, but it is also driving the progs to be more extreme. Not sure which effect is more powerful…yet.

  10. Faced with a president they find repulsive to the core…

    I wonder if the Dems felt that way when DJT was a Democrat and donated money to Democrats.

    1. Of course not. All it takes is the correct label or uniform to sway the tribal loyalty of most. You could swap the entire starting line up between the Red Sox and Yankees and their fan base might grumble for a bit, but they wouldn’t stop rooting for their team (or against their hated rivals).

  11. Well, once they get rid of the right to speech, property and guns there will be plenty of room in the bill of rights to add their new one’s.

  12. All these progressive morons, from presidential contenders to the loud mouth at the city council meeting, have it exactly backwards. Free societies and commerce never force people to do anything. Only government, with a monopoly on legal murder, forces us to do things.

    What drives this inverted logic, for the progressive true-believer? Inability to take responsibility for themselves? Over-arching sympathy and the desire to help (i.e. control) others? Just plain stupidity?

    1. No different than today’s GOP.

      “Mass movements do not need a god, but they do need a devil. Hatred unifies the True Believers.”
      -Eric Hoffer, “The True Believers” (1951)

      Hating government is as authoritarian as hating corporations.
      Why is today’s political right so TOTALLY authoritarian, sneering at consent of the governed … mostly by babbling bullshit about “a republic, not a democracy,” which us a totally separate issue, making them WAY more extreme than even Ayn Rand? 🙁

      1. It is always amusing how you mis-apply quotes.

        1. (yawn) Another unsupported personal attack.

          Hatred DOES unite the TRUE believers, as proven all down this page.
          Eric Hoffer did say that. The True Believers (book) is THE seminal book on zealots and fanatics. We’ve been on to your ilk for nearly 70 years

          The larger context is “Always be pro-liberty; never anti-government.”
          For the reasons stated.

          1. Hating billionaires seems to be in the playbook of one of the Democratic contenders.
            Your Hoffer quote fits her to a ‘tee’.

            1. Left – Right = Zero
              Whataboutism = moral cowardice

              What Democrat has done anything even remotely as shameful as Trump’s DISGUSTING BULLSHIT, defending nazi and white supremacist violence in Charlottesville?

              1. Whataboutism = moral cowardice

                So you then proceed to engagein whataboutism. Holy fucking Christ in heaven Hihn, you were incomprehensibly stupid before your disease rotted out your mind. Do the dignified thing.

                1. What Democrat has done anything even remotely as shameful as Trump’s DISGUSTING BULLSHIT, defending nazi and white supremacist violence in Charlottesville?

                  Here’s the absolute proof .. for Trumptard puppets.

                  Initial assault, Charlottesville– Nazis and white supremacists attacking with clubs, against peaceful protesters
                  “Alt-Left” standing peacefully, no visible clubs or bats.
                  Alt-Right Fascists/Racists crash into them en masse, swinging clubs.
                  Fascists are carrying the same shields as cops in riot gear. The motherfuckers CAME for violence.

                  Next, PROOF Trump is a lying sack of shit

                  1. Part 2

                    The actual video …Trump’s own voice … stating a PROVEN lie… as the snotty punk he is.

                    “What about the alt left that came charging at, as you say, at the alt right? Do they have any assemblage of guilt? What about the fact that they came charging with clubs in their hands swinging clubs? Do they have any problem? I think they do.”

                    Trump lied … shamelessly — to defend Nazi and racist assaults.
                    Alt-left initiated violence. PROOF: Alt-right
                    Wearing black helmets. PROOF: Alt-right.
                    Charged with clubs PROOF: Alt-right
                    Trump saw it personally on TV! PROOF: Obama born in Kenya. (snort)

                    NOW … SNORT … WHO WAS FOUND GUILTY OF THE CHARLOTTESVILLE VIOLENCE?

                    1. Part 3

                      <

                      4 men charged in violent Charlottesville rally described as ‘serial rioters’

                      Three members of a white supremacist group were sentenced to prison Friday for kicking, choking and punching multiple people during the 2017 “United the Right” rally in Charlottesville and other rallies in California. …

                      A fourth defendant, Cole Evan White, will be sentenced at a later date, the attorney’s office said.

                      “These defendants, motivated by hateful ideology, incited and committed acts of violence in Charlottesville, as well at other purported political rallies in California,” U.S. Attorney Thomas T. Cullen said.

                      “They were not interested in peaceful protest or lawful First Amendment expression; instead, they intended to provoke and engage in street battles with those that they perceived as their enemies.”

                      Watch this thread. Trump is NOT not the only psycho-bigot on the alt-right.

                      (vomit)

              2. defending nazi and white supremacist violence in Charlottesville

                One would think this had been sufficiently debunked. All you need to do is watch the full video.

                What Democrat

                Ralph Northam in blackface. Fredo Cuomo threatening someone for calling him Fredo. Portland mayor instructing police to not stop/prosecute Antifa for it’s violence. Maxine Waters calling for intimidation and violence against Trump subordinates. The list goes on as I am sure you are aware.

                1. Rebel Scum … AGAIN!

                  defending nazi and white supremacist violence in Charlottesville

                  One would think this had been sufficiently debunked. All you need to do is watch the full video.

                  AGAIN?? (lol)
                  The video PROOF is here. STRIKE ONE
                  https://reason.com/2019/11/17/democrats-are-conjuring-up-new-rights/#comment-8015825

                  STRIKE TWO — video PROOF that Trump is a fucking liar, defending racists and nazis.

                  *** STRIKE THREE. Also PROOF ON WHO WAS FOUND GUILTY IN CHARLOTTESVILLE. Excerpt from part 3 (link to source there)

                  4 men charged in violent Charlottesville rally described as ‘serial rioters’

                  Three members of a white supremacist group were sentenced to prison Friday for kicking, choking and punching multiple people during the 2017 “United the Right” rally in Charlottesville ….

                  A fourth defendant, Cole Evan White, will be sentenced at a later date,

                  “These defendants, motivated by hateful ideology, incited and committed acts of violence in Charlottesville, as well at other purported political rallies in California,” U.S. Attorney Thomas T. Cullen said.

                  “They were not interested in peaceful protest or lawful First Amendment expression; instead, they intended to provoke and engage in street battles with those that they perceived as their enemies.”

                  Three Strikes … YER OUT

        2. PROVE IT FOR ONCE, JesseAz
          You now have FOUR cowardly evasions (so far)
          BE A MAN.

          Posted in self-defense, again, from an unprovoked aggression, again.

          1. I dont evade anything dear hihn, I just dont have time to fix your ignorance.

      2. Hihn: If you oppose government you are anti-liberty! 91%!!!!!!! CHRISTIAN TALIBAN!!!!!!!!! PAULISTAS!!!!!!!!!!! OH FUCKING FUCK MY DIAPER IS FULL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

        1. HOW CRAZY ARE THEY?

          Hihn: If you oppose government you are anti-liberty!

          FUCKING LIAR. PROOF:

          Hating government is as authoritarian as hating corporations.
          Why is today’s political right so TOTALLY authoritarian, sneering at consent of the governed … mostly by babbling bullshit about “a republic, not a democracy,” which is a totally separate issue, making them WAY more extreme than even Ayn Rand

          For any other far-right thugs (or far left)
          1) YES, it IS authoritarian to deny consent of the governed.

          2) YES, it IS authoritarian to place your will above 350 million Americans

          3) YES, it IS authoritarian, your ARROGANCE in denying people the right to form a government of their choosing.

          We know how authoritarians define a society. This is how libertarians do it (as an example)

          In a free society, a libertarian community exists right next to a Marxist commune … lesbians up the street from a community of Christian Fundies …. retired Catholic priests across the field from Wiccans. Each community would be voluntarily populated. And THAT statue of liberty would be Voltaire, inscribed: “I disagree with what you say, but I will fight to the death for your right to say it.”

          And we KNOW … because you keep showing us .. how much you DETEST such liberty … you just RIDICULED “consent of the governed” and “will of the people.”

          THAT MAKES YOU A MOOCH … SUCKING OFF THE FREEDOM AND PROSPERITY … CREATED AND MAINTAINED BY MEN AND WOMEN .. YOU CLAIM HAD NO RIGHT TO DO SO.

          You found your ideal leader in Donald Trump.
          And Mao Tse Tung
          Josef Stalin
          Pol Pot
          Adolph Hitler
          All the way back to Genghis Khan
          (shudder)
          ,

    2. Only government, with a monopoly on legal murder

      Typical alt-right hysteria.

      1. Typical ctrl-left senile dementia.

        In your ideal system of government you would have been exterminated as the public nuisance that you are 50 years ago Hihn. Live the courage of your convictions. Purchase a shotgun and 1 box of ammunition.

        1. More alt-right hysteria(yawn)
          How fucking psycho is she?

          In your ideal system of government

          you would have been exterminated as the public nuisance that you are 50 years ago Hihn. Live the courage of your convictions. Purchase a shotgun and 1 box of ammunitionWHAT did I describe as an ideal society?

          In a free society, a libertarian community exists right next to a Marxist commune … lesbians up the street from a community of Christian Fundies …. retired Catholic priests across the field from Wiccans. Each community would be voluntarily populated. And THAT statue of liberty would be Voltaire, inscribed: “I disagree with what you say, but I will fight to the death for your right to say it.”

          I added, also in response to her.

          And we KNOW … because you keep showing us .. how much you DETEST such liberty … you just RIDICULED “consent of the governed” and “will of the people.”

          SHOW OF HANDS. HOW MANY AGREE WITH HER … THAT *MY* IDEAL SOCIETY WOULD EXTERMINATE INNOCENT PEOPLE?

          OR is that HER ideal society?

          Purchase a shotgun and 1 box of ammunition.

          The defense rests. 🙂

  13. Re homelessness at least, Dems are gonna win this issue when the Trump administration does what it is likely to do which is to criminalize it.

    Back in Sept – Trump made this cryptic statement while in CA – The people of San Francisco are fed up, and the people of Los Angeles are fed up. We’re looking at it, and we’ll be doing something about it.

    Now why he would give a fuck about helping those people in SF/LA re a homeless problem that is entirely of their own creation and caused by their own NIMBY greed is beyond me. But he clearly did and everything he has said about it is exactly what you would expect a wealthy property owner to say. Which is that homelessness should basically be considered a property crime against the wealthy.

    That has now been followed up with Trump ousting the head of the miniscule US Interagency of Homeless (budget about $4 million – which means the only thing they do is have a few employees who collect statistics about the homeless). That’s not even the size of what an interstate compact re the homeless would be where states might just share ideas re what works and what doesn’t.

    Bet on the next step being some version of the 1932 Bonus Army (or the previous Coxey’s Army). Where a MacArthur type is appointed to send in tanks to raze ‘tent encampments’.

    1. JFree again BRAGS of his own Trumpian contempt for the Constitution, Balance of Power and Federalism.

      Now why he would give a fuck about helping those people in SF/LA re a homeless problem that is entirely of their own creation

      He doesn’t give a fuck. His base LOVES to see his dictatorial obsessions, and LOVES ridiculing California (also dictatorial).

      is beyond me

      Obviously.

      (Trump) has said about it is exactly what you would expect a wealthy property owner to say. Which is that homelessness should basically be considered a property crime against the wealthy.

      WTF????
      Even Trump never said anything thatwacky!/b>

      1. Trump talking to a friendly audience (Tucker Carlson) re homelessness a few months ago. The video on that link contains his full comments

        Excerpts:
        When we have leaders of the world coming in to see the president of the United States and they’re riding down a highway, they can’t be looking at that. I really believe that it hurts our country…
        You can’t have what’s happening — where police officers are getting sick just by walking the beat…
        We cannot ruin our cities. And you have people that work in those cities. They work in office buildings and to get into the building, they have to walk through a scene…
        We may do something to get that whole thing cleaned up. It’s inappropriate…
        It’s destroying their city. And it’s destroying a whole way of life…
        I own property in SF and it used to be beautiful and now its terrible. So we’re looking at doing something. We may intercede. We may do something to get that whole thing cleaned up…

        Every single utterance is about the homeless as the CAUSE of a problem for others who shouldn’t have to worry their pretty little heads over such a thing – and who are being ‘harmed’ by the homeless. Don’t pretend that criminalizing homelessness is something shocking. Every city does it to some degree or other. Most cities in fact spend far more money criminalizing homelessness than in doing anything else about it.

        1. JFree … FAIL … FAIL … FAIL .,..

          The Challenge (boldface in original):

          (JFree)
          (Trump) has said about it is exactly what you would expect a wealthy property owner to say. Which is that homelessness should basically be considered a property crime against the wealthy.

          (liberty)
          WTF????
          Even Trump never said anything that wacky!

          Responds with TONS of hot air …. ALL FAILING THE CHALLENGE … but PROVING Trump’s and his bigotry … and STUPIDITY

          THIS IS THE MASSIVE ASSHOLERY OF TRUMP

          Trump continued, saying most people suffering from homelessness have an accompanying mental illness

          ONE … SICK … FUCK.

          Here’s what JFree SWALLOWED
          1) Foreign leaders drive through slums — in DC, not LA! — from the airport to the White House

          2) Police officers get sick by just walking the beat.

          3)PEOPLE WALK TO WORK — DO NOT PARK NEARBY AND DO NOT TAKE PUBlIC TRANSIT!! 🙂

          1. I’ve never resorted to this. But fuck off Hihn

            1. JFree …. TOTAL FAILURE … AS PROVEN … GOES MORE INFANTILE

              But fuck off Hihn

              ONE MORE TIME FOR THE RIGHT-WING PSYCHO

              YOUR WORDS — TRUMP SAYS HOMELESSNESS SHOULD BE A PROPERTY CRIME AGAINST THE WEALTHY

              YOU WERE CALLED OUT … IN BOLDFACE

              YOU … FAILED … SO PUNISH ME FOR ASKING.

              NOW YOU DEFEND —- ALL FROM YOUR LINK AND WORDS
              1) HOMELESSNESS BEING A MENTAL CONDITION

              2) Foreign leaders drive through slums — in DC, not LA! — from the airport to the White House

              3) Police officers get sick by just walking the beat.

              4)PEOPLE WALK TO WORK — DO NOT PARK NEARBY AND DO NOT TAKE PUBLIC TRANSIT!!

                1. Well he is losing it even more so then normal. He got you and JesseAz confused above. That takes some doing because the two of you are usually arguing from opposite sides of an issue.

                  1. To a goober … “losing it” means calling out another goober’s bullshit … and PROVING the goober a cowardly liar.
                    They huddle together for comfort, like scared 6-year-old girls.

                    (Posted in self-defense from yet another unprovoked assault — the only way their ilk can FEEL manly, since they’re not capable of BEING manly.)

                    1. No “losing it” means when you can’t differentiate the past from the present, don’t know what year it is, can’t differentiate between different people arguing different points with different screen names, and can’t maintain a train of thought because senile dementia has you robbed you of the extraordinarily meager faculties with which you were endowed even in your youth. Nothing is going to get better Hihn. You are going to die very shortly anyway, as a disgusting welfare charge subsisting on Trump’s generosity. Do the dignified thing. Kill yourself. Position the shotgun in your mouth at a 30 degree angle. You will sever your brain stem instantly.

                    2. When you call out “goobers bullshit” try to keep straight who you are calling out. Otherwise, you are the one who appears to be a goober.

                    3. When you call out “goobers bullshit” try to keep straight who you are calling out

                      Who did I reply to? 🙂

                    4. You don’t even know, do you Hihn?

                    5. WHOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOSH
                      My smiley was RIDICULING his dumbass question

                      🙂 This one ridicules you,

                  2. Free usually at least attempts to provide logical arguments. I dont mind discussions with him. Hihn seems to lose his shit in the presence of intelligent thought.

                2. Whiny Pussy AGAIN fails to support his CRAZED bullshit.

                  And AGAIN punishes me for PROVING he’s a blowhard and a coward,

                  1. DERANGED SENILE DEMENTIA PATIENT SUBSISTING ON TRUMP’S WELFARE CONTINUES TO CONFUSE ONE PERSON FROM ANOTHER AND RAGE INCOHERENTLY

                    Some one will be along shortly to administer your medication, change your diaper, and clean the shit off of your clothing, hands and face. Why live like this Hihn?

              1. Fuck off and die, Hihn. Make the world a better and smarter place.

            2. You’re pretty clearly not in support of any of the things that Trump is saying in your quotes, or in general. Which makes Mary’s responses to you all the more insane.

        2. Jfree, Trump correctly diagnoses the problem, as you have written. But the solution is more likely a local fix.

          SF in 2019 reminds me of NYC in the 70s where a bum would rub your windshield with a dirty rag when you were stopped at a light, and then ask for a couple of dollars.

          The cure was aggressive policing, and Rudy Giuliani.

          1. Was that a cure, or did it just infect other cities by exporting their indigent?

      2. You are dumb, and boring, and sloppy, and an asshole.

        1. Then why do I keep KICKING YOUR ASS on actual issues … not intfrantile name-calling, coward.?

            1. (smirk)

              1. Babies do the same thing when they shit their diapers. Funny how life comes full circle isn’t it Hihn?

  14. Rich people are going to have to allow, or be forced to allow, lower-income people to live near them

    He’s talking about repealing NIMBY zoning laws, right?

    1. Doubtful. That’s what a libertarian would do .. but must be a gradual, phase-in.

      1. Of course Hihn. The phase in should be as gradual as the onset of your senile dementia.

        1. It must be gradual to avoid destroying property values, now based on that same exclusivity. Can’t do much without voter support. Authoritarians like you, notwithstanding.

    2. Aha. That is exactly what happens where I live which has a top rated school district. Just try and build any kind of project that includes rental property, even very nice ‘high end’ apartments and they will force it into a referendum. Yellow lawn signs “vote no proposition 8” will proliferate faster than dandelions and it will go down.

      Even retail projects likely to bring in shoppers from “the city” suffer the same fate. If you can afford one of the McMansions they built off Rt. 31 or if your kid can play football or basketball you are welcome of course.

  15. I am making easily persistently $15k to $20k simply by doing direct work at home. Multi month again i have made $45890 from this movement. amazing and smooth to do work and standard pay from this is bewildering. i have propose each final one of you to join this progress right directly as low protection and get than full time salary through take after this association.

    http://buzzjobs.com.nu/

  16. I see the Hihnswarm is here fouling up the comments with his verbal diarrhea and inability to understand anything beyond his simplistic left-right paradigm and how we should all give up our basic freedoms because that’s the only libertarian thing to do.

    1. inability to understand anything beyond his simplistic left-right paradigm

      (snort) I DO THE EXACT OPPOSITE!!!
      LIBERTARIANS HAVE BEEN NEITHER LEFT NOR RIGHT FOR OVER 50 YEARS
      LEFT AND RIGHT ARE …. OBSOLETE.
      Or are you ignorant of what “paradigm” means?
      How about “opposite?”

      1. All the true libertarians are blowing their heads off with a 10 gauge shotgun Hihn. You don’t want to be left out do you? You DO want to be part of the 91% don’t you? Do it Hihn. Everyone will finally love and respect you. All it takes is launching that one 10 gauge slug through the base of your skull, severing your brain stem.

    2. It really is sad if you think about it. He has no family, no friends, and every person who has ever met him hates his guts. This is very clearly demonstrated by his many failed attempts at attaining petty local elected office and the fact that he has been abandoned with no family in a Medicare-funded old age facility to die as a miserable pauper from senile dementia. Fortunately, there is one thing he can do to redeem some shred of dignity. Unfortunately, he has shown no inclination to do so.

  17. Trump screws over some of his base voters by starting a trade war with China. He imposes tariffs on $50 billion in imports from China. China retaliates by imposing its own tariffs of $50 billion on U.S. imports, agricultural products such as soybeans, and the U.S. farmers who grow those products lose—likely permanently—nearly all of their biggest market. The retaliatory tariffs on both sides have only gone up from there. Meanwhile, farm bankruptcies are up 24% this year over 2018, and the total farm debt for 2019 is expected to hit a record high of $416 billion, with net farm income projected to be down 29%.

    Trump still has much support in farm country. Before the midterm elections, an October 2018 poll showed that he was still supported by 62% of farmers. Yet by August 2019, Trump’s approval rating was 9 points underwater in Iowa.

    Farmers tend to vote Republican, and most still will. But for some, it could be the case that personal economics trumps party loyalty.

    Even though farmers received $28 billion in agricultural subsidies over the last two years (more than twice the amount of the 2009 auto bailout of Detroit’s Big Three automakers), the subsidy payments (SOCIALISM!) didn’t match the amount of income lost. 

    https://m.dailykos.com/stories/1899057

    1. Let’s get this straight: the guy who ridicules others for watching FNC quotes the DailyKos?

      1. If you’d clicked his link, you would not have made such a fool of yourself.

        1. “TheLibertyTruthTeller
          November.17.2019 at 2:47 pm
          “If you’d clicked his link, you would not have made such a fool of yourself.Z”

          If you were capable of embarrassment, you’d fuck off and die.

          1. Hihn needs hospice in the worst way. Where they can turn the morphine drip up to 11.

        2. This from the poor senile old dementia-riddled subhuman piece of obsolete dogshit who thinks Wikipedia is a reliable non-partisan source.

          You know Hihn, sometimes you’re so darn funny. But you and everyone else would still be much happier if you shot yourself in the head with a 10 gauge shotgun, severing your brain stem.

    2. Poor pod.

      This sock will never address all the trade restrictions on the books pre-Trump. Costing Americans trillions in lost wealth.

      1. List them, Sparky.
        When will Trump stop FAILING on trade?
        Whataboutism = moral cowardice,

        1. Here you go Hihn

          Got it from a reliable, non-partisan source for you.

          1. Which of those has Trump done ANYTHING about? … by WALKING AWAY FROM FREE-TRADE AGREEMENTS … TOTALLY FUCKING UP ON CHINA … ETC?

  18. This is a replay of “Collectivized Rights.” Just as money becomes as worthless as a Weimar Deutchmark or Brazilian Cruzeiro when printed and circulated by ignorant legal tender laws, so the counterfeiting of fake rights makes real rights worthless. A real right is a moral claim to freedom of action. A fake one is any assertion that word world owes you a living, a condo near work, or room and board at someone else’s expense. The question: “At whose expense?” is as good a touchstone as any for distinguishing right from robbery.

    1. Oh cool, Hihn is operating all of his socks today.

      1. Hank is correct here. Not the norm, but welcome nonetheless.

      2. Hank is his own kind of weirdo. Although he gets this right.

  19. Nice piece, Welch.

    I don’t know about other places, but where I live it seems to be that lower income people tend to work closer to home and people with fancy jobs commute further. I feel like a lot of this rich vs. poor stuff is just based on a few anecdotes and doesn’t really reflect reality very well.

    1. This has been my experience in most cities I’ve lived in, although I haven’t lived in very many really huge ones. Dallas is very much like that, and Denver isn’t much different. Inner cities tend to have a lot of section 8 housing.

      I recall one loft apartment in Dallas we were looking at for around $2000 a month, then we discovered most of the building was section 8. We moved into a place probably a mile away for $1250 with no section 8.

      Weird stuff. The loft with section 8 was in a high-rise in downtown Dallas, pretty centrally located for working anywhere downtown. I was told most residents were able to walk to work, so I suppose make of that what you will.

    2. This is my experience too. Nearby jobs are low paying ones. The higher paying jobs are more specialized work, so of course there are fewer employers for them and scattered far between.

  20. “Here’s a tough thing to talk about, though we must,” O’Rourke said. “Rich people are going to have to allow, or be forced to allow, lower-income people to live near them…

    So…is he in favor of gentrification? By building some nice new upscale developments in lower-income areas, you might get some more rich people moving into those areas for the convenience of being closer to work. It wouldn’t immediately push lower-income people out of their residence in that area.

    1. So …. your “Thinking Mind” concludes that he’s calling for more “upscale housing” for … the homeless!

      Libertarians, the real ones, would throw out the NIMBY zoning and build … are you aware of the “tiny houses” movement? Those same tiny houses could be built in a large apartment building of 200 s/f apartments, with a fancy exterior on the building.

      1. Homelessness is a very important issue to Hihn since he has no means of income and no family to take him in and has to subsist on welfare benefits and the charity of America’s taxpayers to prolong his bitterly miserable existence dying slowly day by day of senile dementia in an assisted living facility.

        Many homeless people kill themselves Hihn. It’s more dignified than becoming a disgusting public charge.

    2. He’s an idiot and his billionaire father in law needs to yank on his leash.

  21. Democrats do like to point to FDR’s ‘four freedoms’ but they seldom reflect on why they were never enacted into law despite Democrat’s having a veto proof majority at the time.
    Roosevelt was a very sharp politician and knew better to actually move on these proposals.

    1. Right-winger suffers FDR Derangement Syndrome! (They’ll swallow anything!)

      Democrats do like to point to FDR’s ‘four freedoms’ but they seldom reflect on why they were never enacted into law despite Democrat’s having a veto proof majority at the time.

      Roosevelt was a very sharp politician and knew better to actually move on these proposals.

      Ummmmm

      Four Freedoms, a formulation of worldwide social and political objectives by U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt in the State of the Union message he delivered to Congress on Jan. 6, 1941. Roosevelt stated these freedoms to be the freedom of speech and expression, the freedom of every person to worship God in his own way, the freedom from want, and the freedom from fear. Roosevelt called for ensuring the latter through “a world-wide reduction of armaments to such a point and in such a thorough fashion that no nation will be in a position to commit an act of physical aggression against any neighbor—anywhere in the world.”
      https://www.britannica.com/event/Four-Freedoms

      He wanted (or claimed to want) the entire world to enjoy the freedoms we are guaranteed — nothing at all to do with the economy he inherited 8 years earlier)

      Note the year of his speech for arms reduction … 1941 … ring a bell?
      (At the time, though, US war planes — the Flying Tigers — were shooting down Japanese war planes over China. Japan and China were at war. And THAT is the most likely reason we suffered Pearl Harbor, near the end of that same year.

      1. Hihn, we don’t have “freedom from want” or “freedom from fear” in our constitution. I know you were very likely illiterate even before you were wracked by senile dementia and unable to formulate coherent thoughts, so I hope this helps you to avoid embarrassment in the future. A more permanent way to avoid such embarrassment would be to shoot yourself in the head with a 10 gauge shotgun, severing your brain stem.

        1. Hihn, we don’t have “freedom from want” or “freedom from fear” in our constitution.

          FEAR OF WAR … CONTEXT!
          Freedom from want … private charities, food banks and the like … at the time (before gummint welfare)

        2. Hihn, we don’t have “freedom from want” or “freedom from fear” in our constitution.

          ANOTHER FUCKUP!

          9th Amendment
          “The enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”

          If and when you take US History, you’ll learn (or try to) that we have rights NOT LISTED IN THE CONSTITUTION …which cannot be denied or disparaged by ANY level of government.

          If you cannot list those rights … all of them … then you’ve AGAIN made an ass of yourself.

          So you managed to screw up TWICE on this one.

          1. Does anyone speak nutcase? Is Hihn the Libertarian trying to tell us that just because “freedom from want” isn’t listed in the Constitution, it could still be guaranteed anyways?

            Or am I just wasting my time trying to parse that boldface spittle-flecked embarrassment?

            1. Is Hihn the Libertarian trying to tell us that just because “freedom from want” isn’t listed in the Constitution, it could still be guaranteed anyways?

              What I said ,.. and PROVED is that she has NO FUCKING CLUE what rights are guaranteed in the Constitution

              OBVIOUSLY ….. NEITHER DO YOU! (lol)
              WHAT I ACTUALLY SAID

              9th Amendment
              “The enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”

              If and when you take US History, you’ll learn (or try to) that we have rights NOT LISTED IN THE CONSTITUTION …which cannot be denied or disparaged by ANY level of government.

              If you cannot list those rights … all of them … then you’ve AGAIN made an ass of yourself.

              And Feddy an even BIGGER ass!
              (He saw the challenge)

              THEY ARE NOT LISTED … INTENTIONALLY, BY THE FOUNDERS..
              I’d explain WHY, but you’re already way over your head.

              1. More like: You’d explain why, but you’ve run out of sneers and bold type.

                1. COWARDLY DIVERSION.

                  YOU WERE CALLED OUT AS A PSYCHO, LIAR.

                  WHICH YOU PROVE BY FAILING TO LIST THE RIGHTS PROTECTED THE NINTH AMENDMENT … AND ATTACKING ME FOR CALLING OUT YOUR FAILURE,

      2. For a self-described libertarian you sure do like sucking off the biggest statists in America and American history.

        1. To the typical right-wing SCUM … I cannot correct his ignorance of FDR’s Four Freedom … unless I suck off FDR’s Presidency????

          Likewise, your SCUM assumes I’m an Obama supporter … if I EVER agree with ANYTHING he has said or done.

          Keep proving how you are so totally driven by blind, raging hatred.

  22. Ambitious, managerial progressivism crashed and burned with the quadruple disappointments of Vietnam, inflation, rising crime, and the longstanding surveillance abuses uncovered in the Watergate scandal.

    Wait, wait, wait… Nixon was a progressive.
    ?!? {marks down in notes}. Ok, Matt, whatever you say.

    Leftists all but launched a revolution to get the US out of Vietnam and started bombing things in response to the criminal activities of the US government in Vietnam. Maybe we should be with them.

    1. Nixon was progressive on a lot of issues. During that time progressive did not equal Democrat.

      1. I get it. George McGovern was responsible for Watergate and Vietnam.

        1. Oh Tony you poor AIDS-ridden faggot.

    2. Wait, wait, wait… Nixon was a progressive

      Read it again.

      1. I did. It segues from the horrors of Vietnam and Nixon’s paranoia to Jerry Brown and Obama’s ACA. It’s kinda like a mashup of Skinny Puppy and Mozart. Is the DJ on drugs?

        1. “It segues from the horrors of Vietnam and Nixon’s paranoia to Jerry Brown and Obama’s ACA. It’s kinda like a mashup of Skinny Puppy and Mozart. Is the DJ on drugs?”

          So bullshit all the way down?
          Not surprising.

        2. Wait, wait, wait… Nixon was a progressive

          Read it again.

          I did. It segues from the horrors of Vietnam and Nixon’s paranoia to Jerry Brown and Obama’s ACA. It’s kinda like a mashup of Skinny Puppy and Mozart. Is the DJ on drugs?

          WHOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOSH
          Then I must read it TO you.
          Where you fucked up, I’ve added boldface

          (FDR’s) idea went nowhere constitutionally, but the principles behind it survived beyond FDR, notably through President Harry Truman’s 1949 Fair Deal, which called for such positive goods as universal health care, and which served as a precursor to Lyndon Johnson’s Great Society programs of the mid-1960s.

          Ambitious, managerial progressivism crashed and burned with the quadruple disappointments of Vietnam, inflation, rising crime, and the longstanding surveillance abuses uncovered in the Watergate scandal.

          TRUMAN AND JOHNSON WERE THE PROGRESSIVES.
          IT WAS THEIR PROGRESSIVISM THAT CRASHED AND BURNED.
          Leading to ..

          The next two Democratic presidents were both defined by what former California Democratic Gov. Jerry Brown once called the “era of limits.” Even President Barack Obama initially coupled his signature domestic expansion of government, the Affordable Care Act, with talk of tackling long-term entitlement reform and enacting a “net spending cut.”

          Matt traced progressivism within DEMOCRATS. Clinton and Obama were moderates.

          Obama got FUCKED by the GOP, who REJECTED the original bipartisan deal … WHICH WOULD HAVE KILLED SINGLE-PAYER FOREVER.

          Obama RAN as a moderate … especially on health care … but it was the GOP who empowered the far-left.

          Since you’re essentially ignorant on these things … before the GOP went bat-shit crazy, they WORKED WITH KENNEDY on tax cuts .. which were STRONGLY opposed by the AFL-CIO and the far-left in Congress.

          THAT IS HOW TO GOVERN. Kennedy’s tax cuts were later copied by … REAGAN … for the ONLY two (peacetime) economic booms since the 1920s

          Dumbass goobers l go ape-shit on Obama running as a moderate on health care, So here’s MORE proof. Gary Johnson’s 2012 ad — FILLED with video clips from Obama’s 2008 campaign. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SpIM0vFbFck&NR=

          1) He SMASHED both Hillary and John Adams on a mandate. with a BETTER argument than ANYONE on the right.

          2) He said we could not consider universal coverage without FIRST reducing the COST of care … which then bipartisan deal would have done

          3)EVERYTHING in that video is a health care moderate. And it was McConnell who fucked it all

          Anything else?

          1. Hmm, maybe i’ve Got it wrong. I would argue that the phrasing of the article is inelegant and that these conservative masquerading as libertarians here are perfectly willing to advance their political agenda by assigning responsibility for the Vietnam War and Richard Nixon to “progressives.”

            1. Hmm, maybe i’ve Got it wrong.

              TOTALLY, and no maybe

              I would argue that the phrasing of the article is inelegant

              LAME. PROVEN LAME.

              and that these conservative masquerading as libertarians here are perfectly willing to advance their political agenda by assigning responsibility for the Vietnam War and Richard Nixon to “progressives.”

              1) That’s what YOU did, as a faux libertarian
              2) TOTAL diversion from your original point.

              ***NOW*** you have NO CLUE when the Vietnam War began!!!

  23. Jeebus H on a skateboard people! If it walks like a Tulpa and shits all over threads like a Tulpa, don’t fucking respond to it!

    I will demonstrate. When it shits in its hand and throws it at me like a monkey, I will not respond.

    1. As a rule, I never even read a post that makes heavy use of bold font or all caps. In any forum.

      1. Much easier than thinking … when you’ve been crushed on an actual issue..

        1. “Much easier than thinking … when you’ve been crushed on an actual issue..”

          As if.
          Fuck off and die, Hihn.

          1. You feed an annoying dog and it will never leave you alone. Even if you kick it.

            1. “You feed an annoying dog and it will never leave you alone. Even if you kick it.”

              I’m not feeding it; I’m kicking it and it deserves to be kicked.

              1. It also likes to be kicked…..

  24. freedom from “unfair competition and domination by monopolies,”

    And what is the largest monopoly? Lol.

  25. Burn it down. For feelz. Totes legit.

    1. It’s pretty disappointing how Dear Leader has worked out. He was supposed to “burn it down”, but all he’s done is condone corruption and put a bunch of plutocrat swamp creatures in charge. I mean, I pretty much knew Dear Leader was full of shit at the get go, but there was the 5% of me that was hoping he’d be different than Obama. Too bad.

      1. LeaveTrumpAloneLibertarian
        November.17.2019 at 3:25 pm
        “It’s pretty disappointing how Dear Leader has worked out.”
        Speaking if disappointing, did you pay your mortgage yet, scumbag?

        1. Yawn. Ad hominems. All Dear Leader has done is deficit spend and lie. That’s pretty much what Richard Nixon, a progressive, did. No wonder why people hate progressivism.

          1. FACT: Trump has already added (very close to) MORE 8- year debt (CBO forecast) than Obama added AFTER 8 years.

            THAT IS A MASSIVE FAILURE — THE ABSOLUTE WORST PRESIDENT EVER. ON DEBT IS (AGAIN) A REPUBLICAN.

            1) Obama inherited the worst economy since the 1930s, but
            .
            2) Trump inherited, from Obama, THE longest economic expansion EVER, for an incoming President, so now a FAILURE by any measure.

            Trump has managed to be even worse than Bush2! (who created roughly half of Obama’s debt.) (Actually it was Clinton who caused the 2008 crash.)

            And Trump campaigned on a 60% tax cut for HIMSELF, and a small sliver of the 1%. (His party, for once jammed THAT up his ass)

            Trump’s tax cuts will FAIL, because even fiscal conservatives are STUPID on competitive taxation, worldwide. They WHINE about high corporate rates, but

            Compare with Canada

            *Corporate rate
            US 21% (large corps only, smaller ones loopholed out by GOP)
            CA 15% (all corps)

            *Dividends
            US — preferred rate
            CA — ZERO

            *Cap Gains
            US — ONLY country to NOT index for inflation
            CA — fully indexed

            **** AN EVEN BIGGER LOSS FOR US. CAN YOU GUESS?
            US – Our world’s most costly healthcare — paid by mostly Employers
            CA — ONLY dental paid by employers.

            Can’t blame just Trump’s GOP for this fucking stupidity
            Include the ENTIRE libertarian establishment..

            Nitwits argue about supply-side vs demand-side.
            But a growing economy is like a 3-legged stool — consumers, employers and investors. If ANY of those legs lacks confidence, the stool falls over

            Now watch all the memorized slogans and soundbites.

            1. Now watch all the memorized slogans and soundbites.

              91%!!!!!!!! PAULISTAS!!!!!!!!!!!! CHRISTIAN TALIBAN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! CATO!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 91%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

              All you’ve retained in your rotted mind is slogans and soundbites Hihn. You literally just posted an entire screed of them. If you weren’t so wracked by senile dementia you might realize the contradictions and absurdities contained within your own twisted logic. Why go on this way? Kill yourself. Die with some dignity intact and make the entire world a better place.

              1. Comparing actual tax rates — US and Canada — is now an entire screed of slogans and soundbites … ESPECIALLY when it PROVES why Trump is FAILING to create the jobs he promised.

                FEEL HER SEETHING HATED IN THE AIR.

          2. “Yawn. Ad hominems.”

            Yeah, pointing out that you’re a scumbag whose word is NWS is certainly an ‘ad hom’
            To a fucking idiot called on his bullshit.

      2. LeaveTrumpAloneLibertarian
        November.17.2019 at 3:25 pm
        “It’s pretty disappointing how Dear Leader has worked out.”
        Speaking if disappointing, did you pay your mortgage yet, scumbag?

        “…but there was the 5% of me that was hoping he’d be different than Obama….”
        Too stupid; did you keep your doctor, scumbag?

        1. Too stupid; did you keep your doctor, scumbag?

          He would have … if the GOP did not FUCK UP the bipartisan package Obama campaigned on. Remember, McConnell’s primary mission was to deny Obama a second term/

          He FAILED on that … and FAILED to support the private alternative to “the public option” … which would have killed single-payer forever.

          It’s REPUBLICANS who created the final version of Obamacare.
          It’s REPUBLICANS who allowed single payer to still be on the table.

          1. Now watch all the memorized slogans and soundbites.

            Oh Hihn.

            1. You DEFEND the GOP fucking up a bipartisan health care package that would have killed single-payer forever?
              *The cheapest structure on earth?
              *Consumer choice (competitors)
              *TOTAL consumer control.

              *WTF?*

              The alternative to “the public option” was a Co-Op HMO, with Seattle’s Group Health Co-Op (GHC) as the model;

              That’s PREPAID health care — NO REIMBURSEMENTS, so cheaper than any public plan on earth.

              Doctors are salaried employees of their patients. They run their own hospitals. Own their own pharmacy — in EVERY clinic; pick up your scripts on the way out of the doctor’s office, refill at ANY local pharmacy.

              Has a 24-hour nurse hotline — which is IMPOSSIBLE under ANY third party plan. CALL FIRST, before rushing your kid to the ER.

              Endorsed at Daily Kos — THE most liberal major political site .,.. AS A PRIVATE ALTERNATIVE TO A PUBLIC OPTION.

              CONSUMER CHOICE — NO MONOPOLY — GHC HAS A LOCAL DIRECT COMPETITOR (ANOTHER CO-OP HMO).

              THANK YOU … THANK YOU … THANK YOU ..
              FOR HAVING ME EXPLAINS HOW BADLY THE REPUBLICANS FUCKED UP … ON HEALTH CARE! (And the libertarian establishment.)

              It’s REPUBLICANS who created the final version of Obamacare.
              It’s REPUBLICANS who allowed single payer to still be on the table.

              AMAZING how IGNORANT they keep you people. The easier to rule you.

              Health Co-op Offers Model for Overhaul
              SAD how badly you people are manipulated by the political elites.
              Anything else? (smirk).

              1. Obamacare was specifically designed to be a bridge to single payer. Obama personally told this to his supporters. There’s actual audio and everything. The entire plan was to have something that would collapse under its own weight, bringing down public support for private health insurance.

                1. Obamacare was specifically designed to be a bridge to single payer

                  Bullshit … from the conspiracy right.

                  Obama personally told this to his supporters.

                  BULLSHIT … same source

                  There’s actual audio and everything

                  THIS ACTUAL VIDEO TRUMPS YOUR BULLSHIT CLAIM

                  Obama won the nomination as a MODERATE on health care!
                  EXPLODES YOUR BRAIN, EH? ,

                  PROOF: Gary Johnson’s 2012 ad — FILLED with video clips from Obama’s 2008 campaign. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SpIM0vFbFck&NR=

                  1) He SMASHED both Hillary and John Adams, by repeatedly attacking and ridiculing their mandate .. which he opposed with a BETTER argument than ANYONE on the right.

                  2) He said we could not consider universal coverage without FIRST reducing the COST of care … which his bipartisan deal would have done

                  3)EVERYTHING in that video is a health care moderate. And it was McConnell who fucked it all

                  The entire plan was to have something that would collapse under its own weight, bringing down public support for private health insurance.

                  THAT’S EVEN CRAZIER!
                  I shall prove THAT, too. But see Part 2, as I cannot add another proof link here

                  1. Part 2

                    Obamacare originally had a bipartisan deal, to get GOP votes and avoid his own far left (like Kennedy did with his tax cuts, IDENTICAL to Reagan’s 1982 cuts) I’ve already PROVEN he campaigned as a moderate on health care

                    The bipartisan deal included … a PRIVATE alternative to the public option favored by his own far.left. DO YOU YOU KNOW WHAT PRIVATE MEANS? And, despite whoever bullshit you, would have likely killed single-payer forever.

                    THE FUCKING PROOF IS TWO COMMENTS ABOVE YOU, IN THIS SAME THREAD!! See: November.17.2019 at 8:39 pm

                    OBAMA’S PRIVATE OPTION WAS ENDORSED BY DAILY KOS.
                    THE MOST FAR-LEFT MAJOR POLITICAL WEBSITE ENDORSED A PRIVATE ALTERNATIVE TO THE LEFT’S GOVERNMENT OPTION.

                    PROOF:
                    http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/8/25/771954/-the-irony-of-Seattles-Group-Health-Coop-as-Conservative-Compromise

                    Despite your seething partisan hatred … Obama had all the pieces put together … got the nomination AND elected as a health care moderate. WHAT WENT WRONG?

                    Mitch McConnell killed it … part of his “plan” to deny Obama a second term … instead he denied AMERICA the best total health care package in decades. And FAILED on removing Obama.

                  2. Correction!

                    “He SMASHED both Hillary and John Adams John EDWARDS”.

          2. TheLibertyTruthTeller
            November.17.2019 at 6:13 pm
            “He would have … if the GOP did not FUCK UP the bipartisan package Obama campaigned on. ”

            Stupid beyond words. There was no ‘bipartisan package’; it was passed without a single R vote. And regardless, Obo knowingly lied about ‘keeping your doctor; anything the Rs could do would have no effect on that whatsoever.
            Are you paid to be this idiotic? Perhaps stupid enough to not even know? Stupid enough to hope others buy your pathetic piles of shit? Advanced dementia?
            Fuck off and die.

            1. Stupid beyond words.

              BWAAAA HAAAA HAAAA

              There was no ‘bipartisan package’; it was passed without a single R vote.

              YOU CRAZY PRICK … BECAUSE YOUR DUMBFUCK REPUBLICANS REFUSED THE FUCKING DEAL … AS I STATED … WHICH WOULD HAVE KILLED SINGLE-PAYER FOREVER …FOR THE REASONS I STATED …. I EVEN LINKED TO PROOF OF THE BIPARTISAN PACKAGE

              …… AND …. I ….. PUT … IT …. ALL …. IN … BOLDFACE …. FOR …. EVEN … THE …. ABSOLUTE … STUPIDEST … READER

              AND YOU STILL FUCKED IT UP??? 🙂
              🙂
              🙂

              Stupid enough to hope others buy your pathetic piles of shit? Advanced dementia? Fuck off and die

              I LINKED TO PROOF, CHUMP … AND WILL NOW LINK TO MORE … SOLELY TO INCREASE YOUR PUBLIC HUMILIATION!!!.

              http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/8/25/771954/-the-irony-of-Seattles-Group-Health-Coop-as-Conservative-Compromise

              BEFORE YOU GO APE-SHIT ABOUT DAILY KOS .,. I SAID THE FAR-LEFT SITE HAD ENDORSED A PRIVATE ALTERNATIVE TO A PUBLIC OPTION ,,, WHICH IS BIPARTISAN, CHUMP ,,,, AND AMPLIFIES THE SHEER STUPIDITY OF THE REPUBLICAN FUCKUP HERE.

              REPEAT FOR SEVOTARDS … REPUBLICANS TURNED DOWN A BIPARTISAN DEAL … WITH A PRIVATE SECTOR ALTERNATIVE …. THAT WOULD HAVE KILLED SINGLE-PAYER FOREVER

              … THAT IS WHAT FORCED OBAMA TO NEED FAR-LEFT VOTES ….THINK ,.. THINK …. MITCH McCONNELL CREATED THE FINAL VERSION OF OBAMACARE … AND LEFT THE DOOR OPEN FOR SINGLE-PAYER

              Advanced dementia?

              Do NOT allow your drooling to drip from your chin to your keyboard … which COULD short it out.
              .
              Will THIS “trigger” ANOTHER raging hissy fit, from the King of Goobers?
              I WILL ENJOY EVERY WORD OF THAT HISSY FIT!!
              Because I will have created it

              1. THE SEVO CRUSH … PART TWO,

                Obama had won the nomination as a MODERATE on health care … destroying his far-left opponents.

                Dumfuck goobers go ape-shit when I say Obama ran as a moderate on health care, So here’s MORE proof! Gary Johnson’s 2012 ad — FILLED with video clips from Obama’s 2008 campaign. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SpIM0vFbFck&NR=

                1) He SMASHED both Hillary and John Adams on a mandate. with a BETTER argument than ANYONE on the right.

                2) He said we could not consider universal coverage without FIRST reducing the COST of care … which the bipartisan deal would have done

                3)EVERYTHING in that video is a health care moderate. And it was McConnell who fucked it all

                THIS WAS EVEN CRAZIER THAN HOW THE BUSHIES PASSED MEDICARE PRESCRIPTIONS.

  26. All this talk of negative rights and positive rights is hokum.

    There are natural rights and then there are civil rights. Natural rights, as the name implies are innate and immutable. Like self defense, or freedom of thought and speech. They require no input or assistance from anyone else.

    Civil rights only exist by some form of agreement. The obvious example is voting rights. Because in order to have a right to vote one must first have an election. And elections of any meaning must involve multiple parties and the multiple parties must first agree upon the subject of the election. To argue that, having decided upon what issue is at stake, those parties somehow lose the ability to decide who votes, or how they will vote is just plain silly.

    1. My understanding is that the founders, or some of the wise ones anyway, opposed political parties because they foresaw what we have now: a choice between a giant douche and a turd sandwich.

    2. Uhhh, no

      Natural rights, as the name implies are innate and immutable. Like self defense, or freedom of thought and speech. They require no input or assistance from anyone else.

      They are USELESS unless defended by others. Umm, proven by CENTURIES of human existence.

      Civil rights only exist by some form of agreement.

      ALL rights do. Even life itself. Tell us how natural rights worked in, oh, the 1200s.

      1. Tell us how natural rights worked in, oh, the 1200s.

        You were alive then Hihn, why don’t you amuse us?

        1. iNFANTILE?

          ad hominem
          [ˌad ˈhämənəm]
          ADJECTIVE
          (of an argument or reaction) directed against a person rather than the position they are maintaining.

          1. TheLibertyTruthTeller
            November.17.2019 at 6:51 pm
            “iNFANTILE?”

            Someone who wasn’t would know there’s a caps-lock key, you fucking ignoramus.

        2. Tell us how natural rights worked in, oh, the 1200s.

          You were alive then Hihn, why don’t you amuse us?

          Need not have been alive … merely educated, sweaty … err, sweety..

          They did NOT work, which is WHY he’s wrong.
          I’m not sure why you are so ignorant of that history.

          P.S. The CONCEPT did not exist until over 400 years later.
          Google John Locke. (smirk)

          1. “P.S. The CONCEPT did not exist until over 400 years later.
            Google John Locke. (smirk)”

            I’m sure the ignoramus known as Hihn is quite certain the CONCEPT of gravity didn’t exist until the late 17th century, and the new world really wasn’t there until 1492.
            Fuck off and die, you idiot. Make the world a smarter place.

            1. ANOTHER cowardly diversion (gloat)
              Sevo is punishing me, because he made a TOTAL ASS of himself, here.
              https://reason.com/2019/11/17/democrats-are-conjuring-up-new-rights/#comment-8017276

              MY claims are REAL.. Click and see, while Sevo BELLOWS.

  27. As I started reading, I was hoping Buttigieg was referring to inclusive zoning, so businesses could locate close to residences.

  28. “Living close to work” … O’Rourke tweeted … “[is] a right for everyone.”

    What’s magic about “work”? Why isn’t it a right for everyone to live close to *everything*?

  29. Beto, without realizing it, has a valid point.
    The government does force people to live far from work, to pollute the environment, to live unhealthy lives, and to screw up the mental health of the youth – all in its quest to undermine the notion of private property.
    But, for once, the culprit isn’t the federal government. It’s the local governments imposing coercive zoning laws on their constituents.
    By not allowing larger buildings, or building additional houses on one’s own land, or banning commercial activities in a neighborhood, local governments piss on the idea of private property while making life extremely unhealthy by artificially increasing the distance between people, which leads to all the social ills I mentioned.

    1. And they are doing that with the full support of the local population.

      I have no idea what Beto is talking about. It was game over for whatever vision he has in mind when Henry Ford invented the mass produced automobile.

      The personal car is a wonderful thing. The individual can choose for themselves where to shop, work, or any other near unlimited choice. The greenies can’t stand this. They want to take away that freedom and build structures and transportation systems forcing you to do all of that according to their ideas and goals. You don’t need a choice of five different groceries. We made sure there is one approved grocery within walking distance.

      The only thing changing the work commute, and it is only for a segment of the workforce is the ability to work remotely for all or part of your job or education. Of course a job close to home is a plus for most people but only one factor in where you work or what you do for a living.

      1. OK, +1:

        ” The greenies can’t stand this. They want to take away that freedom and build structures and transportation systems forcing you to do all of that according to their ideas and goals. You don’t need a choice of five different groceries. We made sure there is one approved grocery within walking distance. ”

        Except sub ‘Watermelons’

  30. BTW, the SJW/QB-impersonator seems to be confused. It looks like his ‘advisors’ are telling him *he* holds the cards and the NFL teams are to do his bidding:
    “Kaepernick throws passes for 40 minutes at strange workout”
    […]
    “Kaepernick threw passes for about 40 minutes at Charles Drew High School and spent nearly that long signing autographs for a crowd that steadily grew as word spread that a quarterback who led the San Francisco 49ers to the Super Bowl and sparked a wave of protests and divisive debate by kneeling during the national anthem was in the neighborhood.
    Kaepernick declared again that he’s ready to play in the NFL.
    If someone will just give him a chance.
    “I’ve been ready for three years,” he said. “I’ve been denied for three years. We all know why.”
    https://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Kaepernick-s-reps-call-audible-workout-moved-at-14840427.php

    Well, one reason might be his lack of spelling ability; ever see “team” spelled “memememe”?
    A local ‘sports-writer’ claims he has the NFL in a ‘quiet panic’; it is ever ‘quiet’.

    1. Well, one reason might be his lack of spelling ability; ever see “team” spelled “memememe”?

      Sevo AGAIN sneers at individual liberty ,.. AGAIN praises the collective over the individual … from deep within his Authoritarian Right cave

      Then there’s THIS!!!

      QB-impersonator

      Which even HE says is crazy!

      HOW MANY “QUARTERBACK-IMPERSONATORS” LEAD THEIR TEAM TO THE SUPER BOWL … AFTER NEARLY TWO DECADES? (smirk)

      a quarterback who led the San Francisco 49ers to the Super Bowl

      Sevo will now likely bellow “Fuck off and die” — or some equivalent witlessness. But his latest blunders are here, in black-and-white, for anyone with an independent mind.

      1. HOW MANY “QUARTERBACK-IMPERSONATORS” LEAD THEIR TEAM TO THE SUPER BOWL … AFTER NEARLY TWO DECADES? (smirk)

        Ummm…quite a few? I’d mention Doug Williams, but you’d call me a racist, so let’s go with Joe Flacco.

        1. TWO GOOBERS INSIST THAT A QUARTERBACK CAN …. IMPERSONATE HIS WAY TO THE SUPER BOWL!

          It’s actually one sock defending his own fuckup … both as attack dogs,

        2. HA! AGAIN!!!

          Google Doug Williams … the Super Bowl MVP, who passed for a Super Bowl record of 340 yards, and four touchdowns … WAS A QUARTERBACK IMPERSONATOR!!! Who nevertheless … was the first African-American quarterback to win a Super Bowl and is still the only one to win Super Bowl MVP. Williams also became the first player in Super Bowl history to pass for four touchdowns in a half, and the only quarterback to throw for four touchdowns in a single quarter.

          His team had gone FIVE years without a Super Bowl appearance ,,, NOT Twenty years.

          Now Google Joe Flacco (lol) lacco was Baltimore’s starting quarterback from 2008 until midway through the 2018 season, and helped lead the Ravens to the playoffs six times; during his tenure in Baltimore the Ravens won the AFC North twice, appeared in three AFC Championship Games, and defeated the San Francisco 49ers to win Super Bowl XLVII following the 2012 season. Flacco was named Super Bowl XLVII’s MVP, concluding a postseason run in which he tied Joe Montana’s single postseason record for touchdown passes (11) without an interception … BUT WAS A QUARTERBACK IMPERSONATOR!!!

          His team went 12 years without a Super Bowl appearance … not 20

          Trumptards, like their orange god, will defend even the bat-shit craziest lie … forever. And/or yell FAKE NEWS … WITCH HUNT …. NO OBSTRUCTION.

          Then again, Trump is a President Impersonator, having been a Businessman Impersonator. So … maybe …

        3. Ummm, Feddy. why did you NOT name the black quarterback … who had a vastly superior record than the white guy you named …. BOTH being “quarterback impersonators” of course!

          1. Just knew you’d play the race card, completely missing my point, which was that teams can get to the super bowl with a barely competent QB. (See SB 50 and the once-superb PFM’s stats.)

            Williams hardly made the field again after that game, but I guess that must have been because of racism, right.

            1. Just knew you’d play the race card,

              ANOTHER PSYChO LIE!

              I’d mention Doug Williams, but you’d call me a racist

              YOU SAID I’D CALL YOU RACIST …. IF YOU PICKED THE BLACK GUY .,.. WHICH IS FUCKING CRAZY ON ITS OWN!

              ONE MORE TIME: “ummm, Feddy. why did you NOT name the black quarterback … who had a vastly superior record than the white guy you named …. BOTH being “quarterback impersonators” of course.”

              WHY ARE YOU SUCH A LYING PUSSY — EVERY TIME YOU FUCK UP???

              Williams hardly made the field again after that game

              BULLSHIT! The TOPIC is leading up to the Super Bowl,

              which was that teams can get to the super bowl with a barely competent QB.

              BULLSHIT
              The TOPIC is “Quarterback
              Impersonators”

              AGAIN: WHY DID YOU IGNORE THE BLACK GUY — WHO HAD A VASTLY SUPERIOR RECORD …. AND NOW YOU SAY HE WAS BARELY COMPETENT … WHEN
              1) the first player in Super Bowl history to pass for four touchdowns in a half,
              2) and the only quarterback to throw for four touchdowns in a single quarter.

              I guess that must have been because of racism, right.

              I listed all the evidence of your likely racism.
              AND YOU ADDED MORE!!! …
              BARELY COMPETENT???

              BARELY C0MPETENT WHEN HE KILLED IN A ELWAY’S DENVER BRONCOS — 42 TO FUCKING 10!!!! BUT YOU’RE NOT RACIST!

              Williams hardly made the field again after that game, but I guess that must have been because of racism, right.

              Injuries. The racism is mostly YOURS, if at anyone’s
              By YOU … NOT by me.

  31. Well, we USED TO all have a right to work close to where you work, but then we started passing all sorts of zoning laws, because being able to living away from where people work became a right.

    1. Well, you can’t ignore the common sense behind some of those laws. While it isn’t the stripper’s fault she can only afford to live by the community/rec center for kids, I can understand why it may be best if she commutes. Maybe remove indoor smoking laws so her and her co-workers don’t have to stand outside and swear by the dumpster in the rear parking lot when they take a smoke break. Since a lot of zoning laws often only apply to new establishments and older ones are grandfathered in I’m referring to an actual incident. In the winter the vomit would freeze to the sidewalk and be there for a week. Normally, I’d blame the rec center for building there, but the situation is so laughable I’ll allow their stupidity for my own amusement.

    1. BUTTER KNIFE – TIDE PODS = MERLE HAGGARD

      1. It’s crackers to slip a rozzer, the dropsy in snide. SEE?
        ANYONE can spout useless gibberish!!

    2. Hihn linking to the American version of Pravda.

      1. CLICK THE LINK TO SEE HOW PSYCHO NOYB2 IS!!

      1. Who cares?

        WHO CARES IF TRUMP IS A PROVEN LIAR ON UKRAINE AND IMPEACHMENT? Umm,

        Real Patriots (place country above mindless tribal conformity)
        Real Libertarians
        Real Conservatives
        Real Liberals.

        Your own total lack of moral standards is noted.

  32. I don’t see the point of essay writing if they can do it professionally to order! I do this every time I am asked to write an essay! here is the site of these guys grademiners.com/case-study-help

    1. Can Michael hire you to write his posts here?

  33. Wonder what the number of postings say about this issue? The reagan-cancer, nazi, republicans have used the federal, state and local governments to force an agenda that is nazi. Turn about is fair play, the whites boys do not have the votes to sustain their poisonous rule. What will this country look like in 2030? That is when the real culture wars will be waging. Warren’s misandry, 30 Tril debt, debt servicing more then the Defense budget, etc. Now, right now the republican’s should immediate acknowledge the US dom pol scenario will look very different, soon.

    1. I am very curious, feyr1965. Can you please enlighten me as to what part of the Republican platform resembles Nazi policies?

      Be specific.

    2. Thanks feyr1965, for adding some partisan balance.
      Now, not EVERY psycho here is a conservatard.
      Celebrate Diversity!!!

      1. Oh Great and Magnificent Hihn. Would you like to answer the question or just splutter more moral preening?

        1. The question has NO relevance to my comment.
          Which was NOT even addressed to you! 🙂 🙂

        2. P.S, Feddy the Asshole … I (metaphorically) RIDICULED him for being a progressive here.
          (smirk)

  34. Democrats Are Conjuring Up New ‘Rights’

    And trying to eliminate actual rights.

    1. Left – Right = Zero

  35. Among the educated, fascism can be EITHER left (Mussolini ) or right (Hitler’s nazis) Mussolini, on the left was NOT a Nazi!!

    Fascism is left-wing because it is collectivist authoritarianism whereas right-wing is individualist freedom.

    1. I KNEW you’d be PSYCHO on that.

  36. Progressives need mandatory rehab for their addiction to Other People’s Money.

    1. Like Trump’s RECORD-BREAKING DEBT???
      hahahahaha

  37. These “rights” come down to Need=Right . . . the Argument from Pity dumbed down to Obama voter level.

  38. Many Republican actions and proposals are ridiculous, and so are many Democratic actions and proposals. O’Rourke’s is one of the more entertaining. That being said, while I do not see rent control as a good idea, the idea that low income people should pay less in taxes, and high income people and corporations should pay more in taxes, is an outstanding idea. Apple pay zero taxes? Amazon pay zero taxes? When they are making billions? It is not ridiculous to say that the tax system is corrupt, when this sort of outrage is legal.

    1. Your TOTAL ignorance of the tax code has allowed you to be brainwashed by the progressive left.

      BY THE WAY, THE RICH SUBSIDIZE NEARLY HALF THE PERSONAL INCOME TAX FOR THE “CORE MIDDLE CLASS” ($40-100k)

      And the middle class does NOT pay a higher income tax rate (average 13.5%) than “millionaires and billionaires” (average 28.3%)

  39. “time to really unleash Washington.”

    One thing that the paid professional sociopathic liars in the Conservative Media (and their allies in the Corporate Media) conveniently pretend to forget to mention is that if Social Security and Medicare (which are in fact “earned benefits” not “government spending”) are removed from the numbers, government spending is at a modern historic low:

    https://www.cbpp.org/research/federal-budget/program-spending-outside-social-security-and-medicare-historically-low-as-a
    Program Spending Outside Social Security and Medicare Historically Low as a Percent of GDP and Projected to Fall Further

    . . . Federal program spending outside Social Security and Medicare is below its 40-year historical average and will decline further under current policies. Total spending on federal programs outside Social Security and Medicare will equal 11.1 percent of GDP in 2019 — below the 40-year average of 11.9 percent — and is projected to decline further over the next ten years, to 9.7 percent of GDP in 2029. . .

Please to post comments