moksha wrote:Wonder about a Fox town hall for Pete Buttigieg. Pete could remind them of their grandsons.
I think he's doing one, actually.
My guess is that any Dem candidate who goes on Fox News has an automatic edge over the rest of the field. It's harder to demonize someone you've seen speak.
God belief is for people who don't want to live life on the universe's terms.
moksha wrote:Wonder about a Fox town hall for Pete Buttigieg. Pete could remind them of their grandsons.
Yep! Pete is very impressive indeed. If he can't make President, he would be a good running mate for someone like Sanders. The man speaks better Norwegian than I do! Plus a bunch of other languages. I can see him becoming a great unifying influence, should he become our next President.
No precept or claim is more likely to be false than one that can only be supported by invoking the claim of Divine authority for it--no matter who or what claims such authority.
“If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; but if you really make them think, they'll hate you.”
― Harlan Ellison
Social Security? Medicare? All the stuff it takes a country to pay for? That's socialism."
That's definitely socialism. Maybe you could add something like, "Do you like having to go to work every morning? That's capitalism. Would you like get paid without going to work? That's socialism. All we have to do is tax the rich and everything will be paid for with enough to cover the debt.
And when the confederates saw Jackson standing fearless as a stone wall the army of Northern Virginia took courage and drove the federal army off their land.
ajax18 wrote:Would you like get paid without going to work? That's ...
...having a rich dad and a trust fund.
Socialism v. capitalism in it's purest sense is about who controls the means of production. And under socialism, it's the people doing the work who control the means of production. The idea socialism is about being a freeloader is simple B.S. spouted by know-nothings.
The world is always full of the sound of waves..but who knows the heart of the sea, a hundred feet down? Who knows it's depth? ~ Eiji Yoshikawa
Social Security? Medicare? All the stuff it takes a country to pay for? That's socialism."
That's definitely socialism.
So is everything else you conveniently left off the list. We're just talking about government spending for the public good (a.k.a. evil socialism).
It's not socialism just because it's government spending you don't like. The idiotic damned wall would be socialism, if we were dumb enough to build it. If you want a wall, well... you're practically a commie.
God belief is for people who don't want to live life on the universe's terms.
So is everything else you conveniently left off the list. We're just talking about government spending for the public good (a.k.a. evil socialism).
It's not socialism just because it's government spending you don't like. The idiotic ____ wall would be socialism, if we were dumb enough to build it. If you want a wall, well... you're practically a commie.
Do you realize Bernie is part of the 1%? Why doesn't he donate his money freely since he has the power to do that right now?
And when the confederates saw Jackson standing fearless as a stone wall the army of Northern Virginia took courage and drove the federal army off their land.
I watched chunks of this. What fascinated me is that the Fox hosts did have questions they expected to nail them to the wall, but their arguments were so dumb that it allowed Sanders to tee off on them. They expected things like, "Aren't you a hypocrite for having money?" to be hardball questions. What gets me about this is that there are lots of ways to ask Sanders hardball questions or really nail him on his rhetoric, and that ain't it . I think it's because the right-wing echo chamber has eroded their ability to actually engage ideas.
ajax18 wrote: Do you realize Bernie is part of the 1%? Why doesn't he donate his money freely since he has the power to do that right now?
Because wanting to change social institutions doesn't logically require you to adopt those changes just yourself to your personal disadvantage. In this case, the goal is to change the system, not personal voluntary behavior. When you are old enough to retire, are you going to reject social security checks because you oppose social security? Do you think failure to do so makes you a hypocrite? Since you oppose socialism in all its forms, do you refuse to enter public libraries or public schools? Does reading a book from a library make you a hypocrite?
ajax18 wrote: Do you realize Bernie is part of the 1%? Why doesn't he donate his money freely since he has the power to do that right now?
This is why you're insufferable and stupid. You can never address points made or answer questions asked, you just pivot to the next Brietbart talking point.
Bernie isn't in the top 1% of income earners. He had a few years of high income recently because of book sales but that was an anomaly that doesn't define him. And it doesn't negate 30+ years in public office making a modest income and running as an Independent when joining the Democrat or Republican party would have been far more profitable. And Bernie doesn't "attack" people simply for being in the 1%. He attacks those who use their wealth to secure privileges for themselves that the expense of the poor. It would be nice if someone on the right would have the intellectual honesty to acknowledge what he actually says instead of relying on Brietbart and FOX News to misrepresent him.
ajax18 wrote:Why doesn't he donate his money freely since he has the power to do that right now?
Because (since he is not dumb) he is not advocating voluntary philanthropy as a means to solve the huge social problems of lack of resources and poverty that afflict advanced western societies. He is advocating that, in a society where wealth inequality is huge and growing larger every day, well-off people should pay a larger share of taxation in order to deal with the above-mentioned problems.
Why? Because?
(a) There is no way that voluntary philanthropy has a cat in hell's chance of raising the amount of money required. Individual gestures of the kind you propose can do nothing useful. There are, for a start, too many rich people who agree with Trump that finding ways to be rich and pay not federal tax is 'smart'. People like that are not about to rebrand as philanthropists.
(b) These are problems that require long-term policy planning and stable funding on a national level. Year to year giving simply does not enable that to be done.
But thank you for your question.
Zadok: I did not have a faith crisis. I discovered that the Church was having a truth crisis. Maksutov: That's the problem with this supernatural stuff, it doesn't really solve anything. It's a placeholder for ignorance.