|
|
Post by freonbale on Sept 7, 2024 19:49:44 GMT
So I see it quite often that you have a huge distrust of the government.
Help me understand why you also want to give the government more power.... I mean all the way up to giving the president immunity to commit crimes.
I don't have that much trust in the government. You claim you distrust the government, but your policies and positions indicate otherwise.
Help me understand.
The problem here, is that you are either too dishonest to frame this correctly or too ignorant. My guess is dishonest. So, the help you need is more integrity. So now we know you do not understand the meaning of TWO terms; Honesty AND Integrity. If you are the best front line warrior the far right can produce, then our concerns over your taking over the country are misplaced. Freon |
|
|
|
Post by Monster Man on Sept 7, 2024 19:51:25 GMT
The problem here, is that you are either too dishonest to frame this correctly or too ignorant. My guess is dishonest. So, the help you need is more integrity. So now we know you do not understand the meaning of TWO terms; Honesty AND Integrity. If you are the best front line warrior the far right can produce, then our concerns over your taking over the country are misplaced. Freon You guys can't even figure out what a woman is... |
|
|
|
Post by freonbale on Sept 7, 2024 20:02:55 GMT
So now we know you do not understand the meaning of TWO terms; Honesty AND Integrity. If you are the best front line warrior the far right can produce, then our concerns over your taking over the country are misplaced. Freon You guys can't even figure out what a woman is... I'm not sure why having a strict definition for that term is important. You seem to think so, but I've yet to hear an actual reason why. I'm confident in my sex and gender, and the trans- people seem to be confident in theirs. The ONLY group who seems to be having issues with their own sex and gender, are people like you. And since no actual harm comes from identifying however one chooses, I really don't care how one identifies. Now I'm sure you have lots of links to what seem like horrible things done by trans- people, but I've seen it, and I'm not convinced there is enough of a 'problem' to warrant mandating these people fit into sexual and gender categories defined by those like you. Couple this to the academic, scientific, and medical fields, which all agree that trans- people are just, well, people. Different from you and I, but no more so than a gay person, or a transvestite. Do you have a problem with gays too? 'Cause women gays are HAWT! The reality is that if you finally find someone who will embrace your hate, bigotry, and close-mindedness enough to procreate with you, given time and the normality of trans- people being around and accepted by most, your children, or theirs, will ultimately consider trans- people no big deal. Freon |
|
|
|
Post by rabbitreborn on Sept 7, 2024 20:08:25 GMT
Presidents start wars where hundreds of thousands die under false pretenses. Obama murdered an American citizen as judge, jury, and executioner. The truth is that presidents have always had perceived immunity. Do you think Trump’s paying off of a porn star was the first “crime” a president has committed in 250 years? These men have people murdered. I just want the law applied equally. Using it against one but not others is just accelerating towards partisan violence, and I don’t want that. I don't think you answered the question. You say you want the law applied equally, and I agree with that, but the question is why you would want the president to have UNLIMITED immunity at all? That puts them in an UNEQUAL application of the law, compared to every other citizen. It goes AGAINST your desire to have limited government. It makes no sense to want one, but also the other, if that is your position. Freon Obviously if we have an executive from one party that can murder American citizens, then the other party’s executive is charged with attempt to imprison for paying hush money, then there is an imbalance that will lead to blood in the streets. I’d prefer they all go to prison. But if only one party goes to prison for crimes while the other acts with impunity, then the other party is asserting complete control without counterbalance. This is practical not ideological. Ideally, government would be radically minimized and decentralized and all of these war-criminals would be in jail. Sadly, you won’t understand any of that. Not your fault. But this is more for others who can understand my position. Enjoy the rest of your weekend. |
|
thor
Legend
Posts: 20,537
Member is Online
|
Post by thor on Sept 7, 2024 20:15:18 GMT
You guys can't even figure out what a woman is... I'm not sure why having a strict definition for that term is important. You seem to think so, but I've yet to hear an actual reason why. I'm confident in my sex and gender, and the trans- people seem to be confident in theirs. The ONLY group who seems to be having issues with their own sex and gender, are people like you. And since no actual harm comes from identifying however one chooses, I really don't care how one identifies. Now I'm sure you have lots of links to what seem like horrible things done by trans- people, but I've seen it, and I'm not convinced there is enough of a 'problem' to warrant mandating these people fit into sexual and gender categories defined by those like you. Couple this to the academic, scientific, and medical fields, which all agree that trans- people are just, well, people. Different from you and I, but no more so than a gay person, or a transvestite. Do you have a problem with gays too? 'Cause women gays are HAWT! The reality is that if you finally find someone who will embrace your hate, bigotry, and close-mindedness enough to procreate with you, given time and the normality of trans- people being around and accepted by most, your children, or theirs, will ultimately consider trans- people no big deal. Freon There is no danger of Jar-Jar reproducing. |
|
RWB
Legend
Posts: 12,825
|
Post by RWB on Sept 7, 2024 20:24:41 GMT
You guys can't even figure out what a woman is... I'm not sure why having a strict definition for that term is important. You seem to think so, but I've yet to hear an actual reason why. I'm confident in my sex and gender, and the trans- people seem to be confident in theirs. The ONLY group who seems to be having issues with their own sex and gender, are people like you. And since no actual harm comes from identifying however one chooses, I really don't care how one identifies. Now I'm sure you have lots of links to what seem like horrible things done by trans- people, but I've seen it, and I'm not convinced there is enough of a 'problem' to warrant mandating these people fit into sexual and gender categories defined by those like you. Couple this to the academic, scientific, and medical fields, which all agree that trans- people are just, well, people. Different from you and I, but no more so than a gay person, or a transvestite. Do you have a problem with gays too? 'Cause women gays are HAWT! The reality is that if you finally find someone who will embrace your hate, bigotry, and close-mindedness enough to procreate with you, given time and the normality of trans- people being around and accepted by most, your children, or theirs, will ultimately consider trans- people no big deal. Freon myself I identify as a Lesbian I just love pussy 😁 |
|
thor
Legend
Posts: 20,537
Member is Online
|
Post by thor on Sept 7, 2024 20:29:09 GMT
I'm not sure why having a strict definition for that term is important. You seem to think so, but I've yet to hear an actual reason why. I'm confident in my sex and gender, and the trans- people seem to be confident in theirs. The ONLY group who seems to be having issues with their own sex and gender, are people like you. And since no actual harm comes from identifying however one chooses, I really don't care how one identifies. Now I'm sure you have lots of links to what seem like horrible things done by trans- people, but I've seen it, and I'm not convinced there is enough of a 'problem' to warrant mandating these people fit into sexual and gender categories defined by those like you. Couple this to the academic, scientific, and medical fields, which all agree that trans- people are just, well, people. Different from you and I, but no more so than a gay person, or a transvestite. Do you have a problem with gays too? 'Cause women gays are HAWT! The reality is that if you finally find someone who will embrace your hate, bigotry, and close-mindedness enough to procreate with you, given time and the normality of trans- people being around and accepted by most, your children, or theirs, will ultimately consider trans- people no big deal. Freon myself I identify as a Lesbian I just love pussy 😁 Ha! +1 |
|
|
|
Post by freonbale on Sept 7, 2024 21:17:37 GMT
I don't think you answered the question. You say you want the law applied equally, and I agree with that, but the question is why you would want the president to have UNLIMITED immunity at all? That puts them in an UNEQUAL application of the law, compared to every other citizen. It goes AGAINST your desire to have limited government. It makes no sense to want one, but also the other, if that is your position. Freon Obviously if we have an executive from one party that can murder American citizens, then the other party’s executive is charged with attempt to imprison for paying hush money, then there is an imbalance that will lead to blood in the streets. I’d prefer they all go to prison. But if only one party goes to prison for crimes while the other acts with impunity, then the other party is asserting complete control without counterbalance. This is practical not ideological. Ideally, government would be radically minimized and decentralized and all of these war-criminals would be in jail. Sadly, you won’t understand any of that. Not your fault. But this is more for others who can understand my position. Enjoy the rest of your weekend. Once again, you did not answer the question. Your position is about EQUAL consequences, but the question was about UNLIMITED IMMUNITY. I think we share the exact same view on the equality part, but our views on unlimited immunity are diametrically opposite. To me, the president is just another citizen, and all citizen laws should apply to them. Period. But not you. You want a president to have unlimited immunity, to be able to do anything she wants, without ever fearing prosecution for breaking the law. The question was about that part, not the equality part, but you either do not understand the question, or more likely, you refuse to answer it because you actually want a monarch (or dictator), and not a president. Freon |
|
|
|
Post by freonbale on Sept 7, 2024 21:22:06 GMT
I'm not sure why having a strict definition for that term is important. You seem to think so, but I've yet to hear an actual reason why. I'm confident in my sex and gender, and the trans- people seem to be confident in theirs. The ONLY group who seems to be having issues with their own sex and gender, are people like you. And since no actual harm comes from identifying however one chooses, I really don't care how one identifies. Now I'm sure you have lots of links to what seem like horrible things done by trans- people, but I've seen it, and I'm not convinced there is enough of a 'problem' to warrant mandating these people fit into sexual and gender categories defined by those like you. Couple this to the academic, scientific, and medical fields, which all agree that trans- people are just, well, people. Different from you and I, but no more so than a gay person, or a transvestite. Do you have a problem with gays too? 'Cause women gays are HAWT! The reality is that if you finally find someone who will embrace your hate, bigotry, and close-mindedness enough to procreate with you, given time and the normality of trans- people being around and accepted by most, your children, or theirs, will ultimately consider trans- people no big deal. Freon There is no danger of Jar-Jar reproducing. He seems the type that will marry someone who completely dominates him, and holds sex as a weapon to make him do whatever he/she wants. I sense no self-confidence in MM, no code of ethics, no morality, and no faith. Intellectually, there is zero curiosity, and zero creativity. However, mechanically, he's probably functional, so on that level, he might be useful to someone. But they will not be with him because they respect and/or admire him. Freon |
|
|
|
Post by freonbale on Sept 7, 2024 21:23:37 GMT
I'm not sure why having a strict definition for that term is important. You seem to think so, but I've yet to hear an actual reason why. I'm confident in my sex and gender, and the trans- people seem to be confident in theirs. The ONLY group who seems to be having issues with their own sex and gender, are people like you. And since no actual harm comes from identifying however one chooses, I really don't care how one identifies. Now I'm sure you have lots of links to what seem like horrible things done by trans- people, but I've seen it, and I'm not convinced there is enough of a 'problem' to warrant mandating these people fit into sexual and gender categories defined by those like you. Couple this to the academic, scientific, and medical fields, which all agree that trans- people are just, well, people. Different from you and I, but no more so than a gay person, or a transvestite. Do you have a problem with gays too? 'Cause women gays are HAWT! The reality is that if you finally find someone who will embrace your hate, bigotry, and close-mindedness enough to procreate with you, given time and the normality of trans- people being around and accepted by most, your children, or theirs, will ultimately consider trans- people no big deal. Freon myself I identify as a Lesbian I just love pussy 😁 Lesbians are HAWT! But they are not nearly the only ones who appreciate what they do. Freon |
|
|
|
Post by atreyu on Sept 7, 2024 23:15:04 GMT
I don't think you answered the question. You say you want the law applied equally, and I agree with that, but the question is why you would want the president to have UNLIMITED immunity at all? That puts them in an UNEQUAL application of the law, compared to every other citizen. It goes AGAINST your desire to have limited government. It makes no sense to want one, but also the other, if that is your position. Freon Obviously if we have an executive from one party that can murder American citizens, then the other party’s executive is charged with attempt to imprison for paying hush money, then there is an imbalance that will lead to blood in the streets. I’d prefer they all go to prison. But if only one party goes to prison for crimes while the other acts with impunity, then the other party is asserting complete control without counterbalance. This is practical not ideological. Ideally, government would be radically minimized and decentralized and all of these war-criminals would be in jail. Sadly, you won’t understand any of that. Not your fault. But this is more for others who can understand my position. Enjoy the rest of your weekend.
I would like anyone that breaks the law to see justice. That doesn't explain the original question which is why does MAGA lean towards the opposite direction?
|
|
|
|
Post by Monster Man on Sept 7, 2024 23:20:39 GMT
Obviously if we have an executive from one party that can murder American citizens, then the other party’s executive is charged with attempt to imprison for paying hush money, then there is an imbalance that will lead to blood in the streets. I’d prefer they all go to prison. But if only one party goes to prison for crimes while the other acts with impunity, then the other party is asserting complete control without counterbalance. This is practical not ideological. Ideally, government would be radically minimized and decentralized and all of these war-criminals would be in jail. Sadly, you won’t understand any of that. Not your fault. But this is more for others who can understand my position. Enjoy the rest of your weekend.
I would like anyone that breaks the law to see justice. That doesn't explain the original question which is why does MAGA lean towards the opposite direction?
Again, the original question was either so ignorant or based on a lie. So, are you ignorant or a liar? Then I can try to help you. |
|
|
|
Post by rabbitreborn on Sept 7, 2024 23:30:05 GMT
Obviously if we have an executive from one party that can murder American citizens, then the other party’s executive is charged with attempt to imprison for paying hush money, then there is an imbalance that will lead to blood in the streets. I’d prefer they all go to prison. But if only one party goes to prison for crimes while the other acts with impunity, then the other party is asserting complete control without counterbalance. This is practical not ideological. Ideally, government would be radically minimized and decentralized and all of these war-criminals would be in jail. Sadly, you won’t understand any of that. Not your fault. But this is more for others who can understand my position. Enjoy the rest of your weekend.
I would like anyone that breaks the law to see justice. That doesn't explain the original question which is why does MAGA lean towards the opposite direction?
I don’t consider victimless crimes to be “crimes” in the same way as I see murder and theft. And I see what the judges think who were appointed by Trump. Not ideal, but better from my perspective. They weren’t going to let me lose my livelihood because I didn’t get a vaccine I didn’t want or need. The other dipshit justices? The ones appointed by Obama and Biden? They would like to turn me into a criminal for my ownership of guns and my silly beliefs that I should decide what medical procedures to get. I also see Cheney and Kinzinger and the other Cheney and the most hard core neocons supporting Biden and now Harris. The ones bloodthirsty to spend Ukrainian generations and risk WWIII for profits for their bomb maker friends. The choice is easy. I’m going to worry about hush money payments? lol. |
|
|
|
Post by rabbitreborn on Sept 7, 2024 23:32:19 GMT
Obviously if we have an executive from one party that can murder American citizens, then the other party’s executive is charged with attempt to imprison for paying hush money, then there is an imbalance that will lead to blood in the streets. I’d prefer they all go to prison. But if only one party goes to prison for crimes while the other acts with impunity, then the other party is asserting complete control without counterbalance. This is practical not ideological. Ideally, government would be radically minimized and decentralized and all of these war-criminals would be in jail. Sadly, you won’t understand any of that. Not your fault. But this is more for others who can understand my position. Enjoy the rest of your weekend. Once again, you did not answer the question. Your position is about EQUAL consequences, but the question was about UNLIMITED IMMUNITY. I don’t think there should be unlimited immunity. |
|
|
|
Post by archie on Sept 8, 2024 0:41:58 GMT
Thor. If the SC hadn't ruled that "presidents aren't above the law" but that they have "qualified immunity for official acts" ... Obama could have been charged.
But let's be honest. The reason "the system" won't hold it against Obama is "the system" you all support is what made the decision to execute American citizens.
It's "the system" that has to go. The fact that you all can be so easily manipulated into defending "the system" when 15 minutes ago you were the biggest critics of said system, is the problem.
Queshank
Someone breaks into your house - you gonna give them a trial? My dogs like fresh meat. I will just watch. |
|
|
|
Post by atreyu on Sept 8, 2024 0:43:26 GMT
I would like anyone that breaks the law to see justice. That doesn't explain the original question which is why does MAGA lean towards the opposite direction?
I don’t consider victimless crimes to be “crimes” in the same way as I see murder and theft. And I see what the judges think who were appointed by Trump. Not ideal, but better from my perspective. They weren’t going to let me lose my livelihood because I didn’t get a vaccine I didn’t want or need. The other dipshit justices? The ones appointed by Obama and Biden? They would like to turn me into a criminal for my ownership of guns and my silly beliefs that I should decide what medical procedures to get. I also see Cheney and Kinzinger and the other Cheney and the most hard core neocons supporting Biden and now Harris. The ones bloodthirsty to spend Ukrainian generations and risk WWIII for profits for their bomb maker friends. The choice is easy. I’m going to worry about hush money payments? lol.
Still no explanation there. Victimless crimes, covid vaccines, let Russia take over Ukraine. <shrug>
|
|
|
|
Post by queshank on Sept 8, 2024 1:22:11 GMT
I truly appreciate you starting this thread atreyu.
It helps me to realize just how radicalized and incapable of critical thinking the left has become. And makes me more confident I've made the right choice every time.
Queshank
|
|
Odysseus
Legend
Trump = Disaster
Posts: 41,115
|
Post by Odysseus on Sept 8, 2024 2:52:55 GMT
I truly appreciate you starting this thread atreyu.
It helps me to realize just how radicalized and incapable of critical thinking the left has become. And makes me more confident I've made the right choice every time.
Queshank
Does that thinking include Donald Trump?
|
|
|
|
Post by freonbale on Sept 8, 2024 2:59:21 GMT
Once again, you did not answer the question. Your position is about EQUAL consequences, but the question was about UNLIMITED IMMUNITY. I don’t think there should be unlimited immunity. Then what is your position on Donald's court cases, many of which hinge on that one issue. Should he be held accountable, or not? Freon |
|
|
|
Post by rabbitreborn on Sept 8, 2024 9:17:33 GMT
I don’t consider victimless crimes to be “crimes” in the same way as I see murder and theft. And I see what the judges think who were appointed by Trump. Not ideal, but better from my perspective. They weren’t going to let me lose my livelihood because I didn’t get a vaccine I didn’t want or need. The other dipshit justices? The ones appointed by Obama and Biden? They would like to turn me into a criminal for my ownership of guns and my silly beliefs that I should decide what medical procedures to get. I also see Cheney and Kinzinger and the other Cheney and the most hard core neocons supporting Biden and now Harris. The ones bloodthirsty to spend Ukrainian generations and risk WWIII for profits for their bomb maker friends. The choice is easy. I’m going to worry about hush money payments? lol.
Still no explanation there. Victimless crimes, covid vaccines, let Russia take over Ukraine. <shrug>
It is not my fault that you are unable or unwilling to see how these concepts are related. Enjoy your Sunday. |
|
