The Sharpest Shooter Challenge
|
jack rip her
|
Posted 3:02 pm, 08/06/2018
|
Harry the progressive liberals did have their way but the road block was congress. Hillery and her gang made sure Bernie would lose. Thats a known fact.
|
|
aFicIoNadoS
|
Posted 8:02 am, 08/06/2018
|
Calling jack partisan shows just what a troll you are. If you really knew anything you’d know jack has no problem with calling either side to the carpet.
|
|
Harbinger
|
Posted 7:14 am, 08/06/2018
|
Jack… you are blinded by partisanship. If progressives had had their way for eight years, the nation would have Medicare for all instead of the Affordable Care Act, for profit prisons would have been outlawed, many more corrupt bankers and brokers would have gone to jail, much more would have been invested more in infrastructure and education, Gorsuch would not be on the Supreme Court, and… please pay attention here Jack, you might learn something… Hillary Clinton would NOT have been the Democratic nominee for President.
Democrat is not a synonym for progressive.
You wingnuts, both on the right and the left, want to make everything a simple zero-sum game, but the real world doesn’t work that way. The political views of most Americans are more complex than you let on. It is, for instance, possible to be personally opposed to abortion but be prochoice based on political principle �" many Libertarians fall into this group. There are defenders of gun rights who despise the NRA for its lies and corruption. There are conservatives who want to impeach Trump. And a vast majority of Americans want secure borders but a majority of them think a border wall is a stupid idea. I could go on, but I think you get the picture.
You and your kind want to reduce everything to black and white with no shades between, which I am sure is convenient for you since it relieves you of the burden of having think for yourself… sad.
See you tomorrow. Harbinger out.
|
|
Lurker2
|
Posted 3:52 pm, 08/05/2018
|
Scott - this is 2018, not 1789. The world, nor the country are the same as they were in the 18th Century. Electricity, frozen food, modern hospitals, nuclear power, interstate highways, NASA, the National Weather Service, FEMA, Medicare, Social Security were all things that did not exist in 1789 and the Founders did not have to address the nature of multi national corporations, abortion, illegal drugs, criminal syndicates, etc., etc.
When you invoke the Founders you invoke them as if they would not have evolved as the nation and the world has evolved. They were not intellectual dinosaurs then, nor would the be now.
|
|
jack rip her
|
Posted 11:33 am, 08/05/2018
|
Like I said earlier, you progressive liberal democrats had your way for 8 years. For the last year and a half you liberals have done nothing but hate the government. You same liberals 20 years ago were screaming to enact the same changes Trump has enacted. Piss on what happened 100 years ago. History does not come close to pertaining to 2018.
|
|
aFicIoNadoS
|
Posted 9:42 am, 08/05/2018
|
When you cut and pasted that monologue?
|
|
aFicIoNadoS
|
Posted 9:41 am, 08/05/2018
|
Who did you plagerize, Harry, when
|
|
Harbinger
|
Posted 8:58 am, 08/05/2018
|
The Founding Fathers…
The rewriting of American history by right wingers, particularly Trumpists, is vulgar, corrupting and ridiculous. You conservatives would have us believe the Founders would side with you on every issue you hold dear. This notion is nonsense, and a disservice to the rationalists who wrote the Declaration and the Constitution.
The Founders were men of widely varying opinion and belief. They disagreed with each other vehemently on the issues of their day; why would they be any different if they were alive now, dealing with today’s issues?
Do you really think Benjamin Franklin, the father of modern meteorology, would side with right wing science deniers on the issue of climate change?
Do you really think James Madison, the architect of the wall between church and state, would want to see “In God We Trust” on our currency or, for that matter, on the Ashe County Courthouse?
Do you really think that George Washington and John Adams, two men who warned again and again about the danger of the nation falling into two political camps, would join any modern political party, much less the party of Trump, a liar who ignores the rule of law and engages in base demagoguery?
Do you really think Thomas Paine would rail against public assistance for the poor? If so, you need to read up on Thomas Paine.
Do you really think that any of these men, rationalists all, when seeing the wonders science has bestowed on us, would see a civilization in decline, regardless of what foaming-at-the-mouth evangelicals might scream at their congregations?
Of course, one can undoubtedly find a Founder who would disagree with whatever conclusions Franklin or Jefferson or Paine might have come up with on any particular issue. And that’s more to my point: there is no way to determine what consensus if any the Founders would have come to on any modern issue, certainly not on most the of issues the right is pushing, issues that by and large require fake facts for any sort of defense.
On a personal note: going forward I will be making only one post per thread per day. Goashe is a fun, little hobby but it can get to be a bit much, especially if you end up engaging with trolls instead of thinkers. Just trying to stay above fray.
See you tomorrow. Harbinger out.
|
|
jrscott295
|
Posted 12:00 am, 08/05/2018
|
The founders most certainly would be leading a revolution. If you don't believe that then you've not read enough of their works. They never intended to have an all reaching federal government that was involved in your daily lives,...but as I said if they had lived the Federal Government would never have grown to its present size. The states empowered the Federal government with very limited powers, keep in mind by the Constitution all the States are still sovereign states, they just cede the powers listed in Article I Section 8 to the Federal Government and almost everything you think of today is not authorized by Article I Section 8.
One of the most egregious misinterpretations is the following line:
The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
Keep in mind this is the preface to the actual powers granted in Article I Section 8 and in the parlance of 1789 general welfare was synonymous with prosperity not what people claim today. You can't be prosperous and maintain the debt load we do.
Jefferson though warned that the natural state of government was to grow, and that the people would have to be vigilant. He thought we should have a Constitutional Convention at least once every 20-25 years.
|
|
aFicIoNadoS
|
Posted 9:59 pm, 08/04/2018
|
That’s the attitude that has given us the gluttonous sloth of a government that we have today
|
|
Lurker2
|
Posted 9:52 pm, 08/04/2018
|
Fins, the purpose of government first and foremost is to be effective. Economic efficiency is not the reason government exists. You are using the term efficient in a different manner when you talk about the processes and levers of government. But even then, the most efficient government is a dictatorship, certainly not a system with multiple checks and balances.
We don't have fire departments for instance to be efficient because efficiency means allowing a lot of things to burn. We have them to be effective. The military is effective, not efficient. Law is supposed to be equitable and effective, not efficient.
Now take Gates Rubber for instance. Their goal was efficiency so as to stay in the market. Their goals do not include equity - being fair to all employees and communities. Gates could not stay in business if they produced the most effective hose because that hose is far more expensive than an efficient hose. Effective means works all the time. Efficient means the most bang for the buck. Equitable means fair.
Fairness has a cost. Effectiveness has a cost.
|
|
Lurker2
|
Posted 9:39 pm, 08/04/2018
|
A lead lawn jockey could have been elected President in 2016 and the current economic expansion would be nearly the same. The current economic situation has nearly nothing to do with Trump. I would be embarrassed to use Coolidge and Harding as a example of anything positive on the economic front. They were idiots that helped bring on the Depression and failed to understand that the urbanizing nature of the US meant that economic panics and depressions would hit harder and harder since more and more people no longer lived on farms and grew their own food.
|
|
Lurker2
|
Posted 9:33 pm, 08/04/2018
|
No scott the founders would not be leading a revolution regarding the size of government. The founders were the business, intellectual, and political stars of their day. They would recognize the difference between the pre-Industrial 18 Century, and the post industrial 21st Century and they would adjust accordingly.
The size of government in the United States is a function of what the public demands combined with the difficulties of governance and maintain stability in a non-agrarian, wage labor, society.
I suspect the founders would not recognize corporations as "people" and that they would require most large entities to create a system whereby their employees are allowed to "buy into" their particular company. They would not have saddled business with the health care business. They would have supported foreign entanglements that protect the American population. The founders were not rigid. When they saw that the Articles of Confederation did not work, and loose not centralized government did not work, they changed to what worked.
They would be aghast at the people who elevate their words spoken and written in the 18th Century to the level of religious dogma. The founders were above all practical, logical, men.
|
|
jack rip her
|
Posted 8:29 pm, 08/04/2018
|
Like I told hair brain days ago, he has tunnel vision. Hes the troll looking for support. My bet is he doesnt even live in Ashe county.
|
|
aFicIoNadoS
|
Posted 5:07 pm, 08/04/2018
|
Ah, you can’t handle the real truth. Figured. I knew reality would shut you up.
|
|
Harbinger
|
Posted 4:58 pm, 08/04/2018
|
Fins... you are now simply making up numbers. You are an obvious troll. I will treat you as such.
|
|
aFicIoNadoS
|
Posted 11:50 am, 08/04/2018
|
Why are you bound and determined to try to tear apart any good news about the economy just because of who is president? Are you that much of a partisan hack that you can’t accept reality?
If you bothered to dig into the details, 2018 started off very strong. The 7% increase over 2017 was in 1st and 2nd quarters. Q3 and Q4 for 2018 are expected to be leveled off. But 2019 is predicted another 7% increase in Q1.
|
|
Harbinger
|
Posted 10:33 am, 08/04/2018
|
Fins Was it the January 9, 2018 article from NAHB? This article contains the only reference I could find to a 7 percent increase, but the prediction wasn’t for the first quarter of next year, but for the whole of 2018. And it wasn’t a prediction concerning new home starts, only remodeling.
Here is the pertinent paragraph from NAHB article:
Meanwhile home remodeling is posting strong market conditions, due in part to strong demand in the wake of the terrible hurricane and wildfire season in 2017. Residential remodeling activity is expected to register a 7 percent gain in 2018 over last year.
If your information came from another source, please let us know.
|
|
jack rip her
|
Posted 9:20 am, 08/04/2018
|
Carry yourself in a building supply hair brain. I know delivery drivers that are working until 9pm trying to keep up with deliveries to contractors. Look at the supply on the yards. Its state wide. I cant speak for the nation but I can for the state. You must live in front of a computer screen.
|
|
Olejoe
|
Posted 9:13 am, 08/04/2018
|
Harbinger, if you could do a better job on the economy than Trump why don't you run for President?..... and I'll vote for you.
|
|
|
