The Philosophy Discussion Forum

Dup.

“We’ve accomplished a lot with respect to NATO… everyone has agreed to substantially up their commitment, they are going to up it to levels they never thought of before.”
- POTUS Trump



How can you not like the guy.

*

Leftist Reasoning

Hating Trump:
- Trump has told NATO members to pay up.
- If governments must pay more into NATO, that means less money is available for government-funded social programs.
- Ergo, it’s Trump’s fault that he and his policies are hated.

Once again, Leftist hypocrisy, exposed!

So many calluses, so little time.

It's for their own good. Deadbeat NATO countries need a sense of ownership for NATO to work, otherwise it's just graffiti on the walls.

That used to be a common philosophy.

In the US, it’s what made Roosevelt’s Public Works Administration so commonsensical.

Need a bit-o-skin in the game: blood sweat and tears ... and money actually is those things.

Greta wrote: ↑Thu Jul 12, 2018 12:31 am

Walker wrote: ↑Wed Jul 11, 2018 7:28 am

Greta wrote: ↑Wed Jul 11, 2018 1:34 am There is a constant push and pull between corporate and individual welfare in areas where they don't much intersect. Those who favour more controls of individuals are conservatives and those who favour more freedom for individuals are liberals. From that tussling comes the society we have at any given time as the pendulum swings one way and then another.

"Those who favour more controls of individuals are conservatives ..."

No Greta. It's the opposite. Fewer regulations.

It's part of Trump's platform.

Only liberty for business, but MUCH more control over individuals.

Hence the word "liberal", as in "liberty". Hence conservatives want to control of women's reproduction, sexuality, personal body chemistry, gender expression, artistic expression, plus they tend to throw a LOT more people in prison.

Greta, Leftists have filled the prisons in more ways than one.

Bill Clinton regrets ‘three strikes’ bill.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-33545971

As for the rest, you are speaking from a No mentality, and that can be addressed in detail of philosophy and you may want to save it for later considering recent postings, however for the purposes of broadest introduction generality,

You are saying that conservatives want to say No to women.
This is understandable that you think that way.

However, your thinking is again 180 degrees away from objectivity.

No applied to conservatives is only predicated on the assumption that you are right.
But, you have no evidence.
And, you are wrong.

The fact is, conservatives function from a basis of Yes.
Spend some time and contemplate how putting abortion to the legislative test is anything other than saying Yes.

Trump also functions from a basis of Yes, even though someone may have a record of him saying, No.

Yes is the foundation of his life.
And now he represents the country, and must endure the nonsense of distraction and disunity of the Dems.

For the Left, it’s all about the power. Trump has it. They want it. And with Trump it’s not really Right or Left. It’s constitution vs establishment power-grabs.

So, if the thread continues with more personal trashing, I'll finally submit and end your torment of truth, and indulge the summer of pleasure to entertain thought.

Folks like Lacewing are quick to point out Trump is a big fat liar.

It pains me to admit they're right...

http://www.politifact.com/obama-like-health-care-keep/

...Trump said I coukd keep my healthcare plan, I lost my healthcare plan, Trump lied.

Oh...wait...

(C)onservatives want...control of women's reproduction, sexuality, personal body chemistry, gender expression, artistic expression, plus they tend to throw a LOT more people in prison.

And 'progressives' want to abort babies (I don't care if I'm crowning, abort it!), make sex inconsequential (I share bodily fluids with people I wouldn't give fifty cents to cuz it's just sex), alter personal body chemistry (smoke that weed, Jimmy!), reduce gender to a mere fad (to hell with my XY, I'm a girl!), make art just another avenue of official propaganda (I'm sorry, you're novel doesn't meet our social justice standards), and punish all non-progressives (you won't acknowledge this six-foot albino man is a dwarf black woman? Hater!).

Folks like me, however, just wanna take over the world and leave all of you alone.

Well I think the video has been well and truly confirmed by both sides now and what a bore it's been.

Here's why you are a f****** idiot:

Walker wrote: ↑Thu Jul 12, 2018 12:29 pmVan Jones is a slick poseur...

You let your personal view of someone determine how you respond to their arguments. That is what ad hominem means. So for instance, at 4 minutes into the clip, Van Jones makes the point that liberals often accuse poor white conservatives of being stupid, because they vote against their economic interests. Rich white liberals vote for things like Obamacare, which they will have to pay for, but probably never use, so it is clearly not in their economic interest. Rather than being accused of stupidity, such ideals are meant to be noble. As Van Jones says, in it's own way, it is just as noble to not take handouts and to want to stand on your own two feet. I learnt something from that. How about you?

uwot wrote: ↑Thu Jul 12, 2018 9:43 pm Here's why you are a f****** idiot:

Walker wrote: ↑Thu Jul 12, 2018 12:29 pmVan Jones is a slick poseur...

You let your personal view of someone determine how you respond to their arguments. That is what ad hominem means. So for instance, at 4 minutes into the clip, Van Jones makes the point that liberals often accuse poor white conservatives of being stupid, because they vote against their economic interests. Rich white liberals vote for things like Obamacare, which they will have to pay for, but probably never use, so it is clearly not in their economic interest. Rather than being accused of stupidity, such ideals are meant to be noble. As Van Jones says, in it's own way, it is just as noble to not take handouts and to want to stand on your own two feet. I learnt something from that. How about you?

I’ll tell you that Jones is about bias, since you can’t manage to struggle to an identified principle on your own, even in your own thread.

Here’s some red meat theater for the red state about bias, so you can continue on with knowledge, instead of whatever fantasy pops into your head.

The relentless application of logic, such as demonstrated in this video, can be rather heady to witness.

I must admit it is a nice balance to the Tomfoolery.

The outrage against the proceedings was based on the proclaimed sanctity of the FBI, rather than the law-constitutionality of the executive branch.

Six minutes of rationality.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_cont ... wHiIaUNvXw

*

Anyway, it was your choice to do what you must, which is to accept the offer.
Frankly, I don’t blame you.

Walker, I understand that your Führer is somehow vitally important to your sense of identity as an unwanted middle aged white man.

However, even you should at least be able to admit that Trump must immediately:

- submit his finances for audit like all other Presidents

- properly separate his business dealings from his public duties, not just hand it all to his children to mind for him while Daddy's on a project

- allow the Russian probe to run its course without interference

- cease the intimidation campaign on Stormy Daniels.

After all, you would have demanded these things from Obama if the situation was reversed ... and you wouldn't want to be exposed as a hypocrite, would you?

Sorry my fault.

I can't tell if you're being silly or serious anymore.

You try to make this thread about me, requiring me to account for every inconsistency that you yourself perceive about Trump, when all Walker ever was or could be to you, is what you perceive.

I just find that funny.

Wonder how Van Jones got security clearance into the oval office.

I could care less that the press failed to vet Obama.
The fix was in.

Walker wrote: ↑Thu Jul 12, 2018 10:24 pmI’ll tell you that Jones is about bias...

And that is your unbiased opinion?

Walker wrote: ↑Thu Jul 12, 2018 10:24 pmSix minutes of rationality.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_cont ... wHiIaUNvXw

What on Earth has that got to do with Van Jones?

uwot wrote: ↑Thu Jul 12, 2018 11:32 pm

Walker wrote: ↑Thu Jul 12, 2018 10:24 pmI’ll tell you that Jones is about bias...

And that is your unbiased opinion?

Walker wrote: ↑Thu Jul 12, 2018 10:24 pmSix minutes of rationality.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_cont ... wHiIaUNvXw

What on Earth has that got to do with Van Jones?

I am biased against Jones.
For his politics.
Security clearances are also biased against his politics.
And, I’m starting to develop a big bias against morons.

He and Obama both pissed on their own credibility.

I’m not trying to fool you about the bias.

Van Jones is hiding his bias, and you like it.

Like I said in the beginning, why the hell should I listen to Van Jones define and advise?
No reason.

I’m not a f****** moron like you.

Figure the video out for yourself, see if does you some good.