Al Franken takes dummy Ted Cruz to School

[Uncensored2008]

A sense of individual responsibility needs to be impressed on individuals in such a system, no doubt. There is also a responsibility for individuals to stay informed about the world they live in. Many people fall short of these societal responsibilities in at least one or the other of these areas.

I think the thing that most libertarians miss is that they themselves have benefited from the social contract. Whether through education, a complete infrastructure or a market with enough confidence to continue operating, we've all benefited from this type of system. But in their minds, whatever they have has been derived from nothing but their own effort.

So, it is the duty of the producers for provide for those who produce nothing, based on their need?

Instead of the code of honest men, where we trade value for value, you advocate that we trade value for need?

 

[JoeNormal]

Here's the thing that you and Kaz don't seem to grasp. None of us on this forum (that I'm aware of) are advocating pure socialism or communism.

Of course not - that leaves nothing to loot.

You advocate the double-standard, where men work for the benefit of those who produce nothing. Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot all provided limited markets and promoted black markets. Pure socialism leaves nothing but ashes, there must be some commerce allowed or those with pull will have nothing the seize.

My personal ideal would be something like Europe - basically capitalism with some social support. Absolutists like you two think that amounts to full blown socialism. Yet strangely, when it's convenient to your point, Europeans have free market economies. And neither of you can point to a pure libertarian system that has been a success. Good luck being taken seriously.

Funny that I just said the opposite - but then, you have a script from the hate sites that you argue from, you cannot actually engage in a rational conversation. You argue a caricature of what KOS defines as a Libertarian, not against my actual argument.

I don't read from a script. I generate my own hate.

I do sometimes wonder how you and other absolutists function in the real world. It must be incredibly frustrating that the world doesn't conform to your narrow sense of what it should be.

 

[zeke]

So, it is the duty of the producers for provide for those who produce nothing, based on their need?

Instead of the code of honest men, where we trade value for value, you advocate that we trade value for need?

Are you really saying that poor people have no value? That there is no intrinsic value in human life?
If they have nothing that you considerable "valuable" what do you want to do? Shoot em?

Besides that, it is not your mythical 'producers" who solely provide for those in need. It is society in general.
As in, I am a part of society and Joe Normal is a part, even you (though you sure do seem to hate society) are a part. Even if unwilling.

 

[Uncensored2008]

I don't read from a script. I generate my own hate.

Is that the standard response from KOS on "how to defeat a Libertarian?" (or as they put it, a "running dog capitalist pig.)

I do sometimes wonder how you and other absolutists function in the real world. It must be incredibly frustrating that the world doesn't conform to your narrow sense of what it should be.

Absolutist?

LOL

Well, good luck with that.

 

[JoeNormal]

I don't read from a script. I generate my own hate.

Is that the standard response from KOS on "how to defeat a Libertarian?" (or as they put it, a "running dog capitalist pig.)

I do sometimes wonder how you and other absolutists function in the real world. It must be incredibly frustrating that the world doesn't conform to your narrow sense of what it should be.

Absolutist?

LOL

Well, good luck with that.

I can't even remember the last time I looked at KOS. You should try reading your own posts sometime. It'd be an eye opener to most people. Maybe not to you.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Are you really saying that poor people have no value?

Can you quote me saying that, or is slander your only means of avoiding what I actually said?

That there is no intrinsic value in human life?
If they have nothing that you considerable "valuable" what do you want to do? Shoot em?

Besides that, it is not your mythical 'producers" who solely provide for those in need. It is society in general.
As in, I am a part of society and Joe Normal is a part, even you (though you sure do seem to hate society) are a part. Even if unwilling.

Society has no intrinsic meaning. You promote a society of savages and cannibals, where force is the final arbiter. I support a society of trade, where the exchange of value between honest men and women is the foundation for human interaction.

Both are societies, but only one of them would I live in.

 

[JoeNormal]

Are you really saying that poor people have no value?

Can you quote me saying that, or is slander your only means of avoiding what I actually said?

That there is no intrinsic value in human life?
If they have nothing that you considerable "valuable" what do you want to do? Shoot em?

Besides that, it is not your mythical 'producers" who solely provide for those in need. It is society in general.
As in, I am a part of society and Joe Normal is a part, even you (though you sure do seem to hate society) are a part. Even if unwilling.

Society has no intrinsic meaning. You promote a society of savages and cannibals, where force is the final arbiter. I support a society of trade, where the exchange of value between honest men and women is the foundation for human interaction.

Both are societies, but only one of them would I live in.

Out of curiosity, what do you trade?

 

[Uncensored2008]

Out of curiosity, what do you trade?

My talent, my intellect, and my time, to those who are willing to buy them.

Why do you ask?

 

[JoeNormal]

Out of curiosity, what do you trade?

My talent, my intellect, and my time, to those who are willing to buy them.

Why do you ask?

Pretty vague. Sounds like we're in the same business. Can you be more specific? I help design products in the consumer electronics industry.

 

[Mojo2]

Al Franken struggles to explain net neutrality to Ted Cruz: You are ‘completely wrong’

Explaining a moderately complicated policy to an extremist... a struggle.

But Franken told CNN’s Candy Crowley that Cruz had the concept of net neutrality “completely wrong.”

“CNN’s website, [and] a blogger in Duluth, Minnesota travels at the same speed… The New York Times, their website travels the same speed,” Franken pointed out. “That’s the way that it’s been from the beginning. And we want to keep it that way.”

“He has it completely wrong, he just doesn’t understand what this issue is,” the Minnesota Democrat said of Cruz. “We’ve had net neutrality the entire history of the Internet.”

Franken observed that “Obamacare was government program that fixed something, that changed things. This is about reclassifying something so it stays the same. This would keep things exactly the same as they’ve been.”

Watch the video below from CNN’s State of the Union, broadcast Nov. 16, 2014.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Pretty vague. Sounds like we're in the same business. Can you be more specific? I help design products in the consumer electronics industry.

You mean what do I do for a living? Why didn't you ask?

I am the IT Director for a Fortune 500.

 

[Mojo2]

Franken's a Fuck.

Despite Franken's long history in the entertainment industry, you don't see him hogging the spotlight, do you? He's not out there running to the cameras to get attention. In fact, you hardly ever see him. Know why? It's because he's doing the work. A lot of what's involved (or what's supposed to BE involved) with being a representative or a Senator is immersing yourself in the issues. That means reading and educating yourself. That means briefing books, and reports, and numbers, and summaries of reports which include evidence, and numbers, and comparisons, and cost-benefit analyses. It's pretty dry and boring stuff.

Meanwhile, men like Cruz, who just so happens to be one of the new darlings of the right, run around making noise and trying to get attention like a stripper with a new boob job. Cruz is like the Dennis Rodman of the Senate.

"Meanwhile, men like Cruz, who just so happens to be one of the new darlings of the right, run around making noise and trying to get attention like a stripper with a new boob job. Cruz is like the Dennis Rodman of the Senate."

Prominent Harvard Prof. Alan Dershowitz’s Comments About Ted Cruz Could Help His 2016 Chances

Apr. 7, 2014 11:03am

Prominent Harvard Law professor Alan Dershowitz offered words of praise for former student Ted Cruz in a new interview with the Philadelphia Inquirer:

U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz (R., Texas): “Off-the-charts brilliant. And you know, liberals make the terrible mistake, including some of my friends and colleagues, of thinking that all conservatives are dumb.

And I think one of the reasons that conservatives have been beating liberals in the courts and in public debates is because we underestimate them.

Never underestimate Ted Cruz.

He is off-the-chart brilliant. I don’t agree with his politics.”

But the retiring Dershowitz couldn’t similarly evaluate another Harvard Law alumnus:

There was also the Harvard Law student who couldn’t get into a Dershowitz class despite multiple attempts: Barack Obama.

“Twice because the computer kept him out,” Dershowitz said. “It wasn’t my fault.”

(H/T: Weasel Zippers)​

Prominent Harvard Prof. Alan Dershowitz 8217 s Comments About Ted Cruz Could Help His 2016 Chances TheBlaze.com

Mustang, you are known by the silly comments you make and the disreputable company you keep.

Ewwww!

Agree x 7
Ravi rightwinger Dana7360 konradv MrDVS1 Coloradomtnman Political Junky

Thank You! x 1
Seawytch

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Even in the most perverse instances of Europe, the market economies have returned the best standard of living people in the area have ever experienced.

Can you point to any authoritarian/socialist system that has improved the lives of those enslaved under it?

Here's the thing that you and Kaz don't seem to grasp. None of us on this forum (that I'm aware of) are advocating pure socialism or communism. My personal ideal would be something like Europe - basically capitalism with some social support. Absolutists like you two think that amounts to full blown socialism. Yet strangely, when it's convenient to your point, Europeans have free market economies. And neither of you can point to a pure libertarian system that has been a success. Good luck being taken seriously.

Nonsense.

Sustaining those who are unable to sustain themselves is a primary tenet of Judea-Christian values.
Socialism does not seek to sustain those who cannot sustain itself... it seeks to use social subsidy as a means to coerce individuals to exchange their political support for their government stipend.

Such policy neither serves the interests of the individuals being supported or the collective from which the property that is transferred, was confiscated.

What you do not realize is that where a familiar community joins in collective support, such policy may very well be perfectly appropriate and may very well work fine. But beyond the familial, accountability falls to the wayside and absent familial accountability, the tendency of human nature is to demand the subsistence as their right. The subsistence then becomes that which they depend upon, depriving them of the natural impetus to provide such for themselves, which is otherwise essential to the human spirit, thus to human health.

Therefore it becomes clear that the endless movement to carry that which is appropriate for a family, to be used as the construct of national policy, are foolish, misguided and never to be tolerated by any culture which seeks to remain viable.

In complex, rapidly changing societies like ours, individual fortunes can turn on a dime. There needs to be a way to address that and other countries (mainly in Europe) have found a way to do it. When an industry of company goes down, there should be a support system in place that keeps people afloat and safe from losing everything they've worked for. Without that, good luck convincing people to invest themselves in it. Look at the millennials. They can see the American dream is bullshit and they're generally not buying into it.

There's also a significant ramp-up time to gain entry into these complex systems. We used to subsidize universities to encourage people to invest in that ramp-up time. That'll probably be the next thing on the austerity chopping block.

I will agree that such a system can be abused. Any system can be abused. Ours is being abused by the players in our financial system, our lobbyists and our corporations. These players need to be cleaned up to a greater degree than the welfare cheats that will inevitably infest this system.

Such systems not only 'can be' abused, they are DESIGNED to BE ABUSED. It is human nature TO ABUSE THEM. And why is THAT?

It IS THAT, because as you have implied above, THEY ARE ENTITLED TO USE THEM! Therefore, why would they alter their behavior, say by making concessions in Collective bargaining contracts, which would spare the 'rapidly changing, highly complex markets' to prevent the company or industry they 'depend' upon to avoid going BUST or to get help with their addiction, or to otherwise stop the behavior which is leading them directly toward calamity?

You feel that these systems are essential, I tell you that these systems are essential only to the destruction of the individual and that you conflate Entitlement with Charity. The former induces false pride, the latter humility... the former is destructive, the latter is essential to viable PROGRESS!

Therefore you're advocating for policy which is destructive to the very thing which you otherwise claim to be your goal.

A sense of individual responsibility needs to be impressed on individuals in such a system, no doubt. There is also a responsibility for individuals to stay informed about the world they live in. Many people fall short of these societal responsibilities in at least one or the other of these areas.

Yes... and nature has a way of encouraging people to do just that. Nature uses a thing called "Hunger", this is similar to 'the need for shelter and clothing'. It promotes a thing called 'incentive', which is similar to ambition, but much more closely related to a thing called survival. Ambition is closer to the thing called prosperity, which for those we're discussing is irrelevant, until they embrace incentive and spend some time off the edge of survival.

I think the thing that most libertarians miss is that they themselves have benefited from the social contract.

There's no such thing as a social contract. That is a myth created by 'the Left', which seeks to shift the 'responsibility' you noted above that is intrinsic to the individual, to the rest of us, when in truth the would-be 'contract' serves as a means to influence such individuals into the false notion that they have no such responsibilities, because those responsibilities belong to 'everyone else'.

Whether through education, a complete infrastructure or a market with enough confidence to continue operating, we've all benefited from this type of system. But in their minds, whatever they have has been derived from nothing but their own effort.

In truth, most of the people in the United States have never taken a cent from the US Government, which they did not earn through performance of an actual, literal contract, which exchanged their services and products for the value possessed by the government.

In truth, the welfare subsidies have only caused problems, having never solved anything. The entire premise of 'the social contract', is fatally flawed and thoroughly counter productive.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Such systems not only 'can be' abused, they are DESIGNED to BE ABUSED. It is human nature TO ABUSE THEM. And why is THAT?

You mean like how the bankers of the USA abused our banking system. Right?

Could be I guess, do you have a specific example? My guess is that ya do not, but I'm prepared to let you prove it, through your failure to provide such.

YOU are talking about the guys who collapsed the economy by abusing the system. Right.

Are you talking about the recent collapse of the financial markets? Which came as a direct result of the Ideological Left spending decades coercing the financial markets to set aside sound, actuarial lending principle for their perverted notions of 'fairness'?

If that is your example, you are NOT going to enjoy this discussion much at all, of that you can rest assured.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Franken's a Fuck.

Despite Franken's long history in the entertainment industry, you don't see him hogging the spotlight, do you? He's not out there running to the cameras to get attention. In fact, you hardly ever see him. Know why? It's because he's doing the work. ... .

LOL! Nonsense. Franken is not running to the media because he knows that he'd humiliate himself... because he's over his head. Like you and every other Leftist, Franken is CLUELESS on even the most basic understanding of government; it's purpose, how it works and why... .

His job is to vote how Reid tells him to vote and the INSTANT he is set before the cameras and exposed to questions by a vigilant media, he knows that THAT fact will be obvious to EVERYONE and he is desperate to avoid that.

 

[Mojo2]

Great. Net neutrality does not regulate the internet. It simply prohibits companies like Comcast from restricting the free and fair exchange of ideas.

False, it changes the internet from a title I utility to a title II utility - allowing the FCC to regulate it the way they do telephone and cell phone service.

Having the FCC regulate the internet is the stupidest idea leftists have ever come up with.

It's sneaky smart if they could get away with it but ultimately it is stupid.

 

[daws101]

Lucky for you, you're free of all of those, duhs!

false as always. I've been infected by the first two for many years .
the others are mostly genetic and you have all the markers...

What a pathetically flaccid retort.

No doubt the best you could do! [/QUOTE]another thing you an expert in, being flaccid!

 

[daws101]

Tell the truth, you masturbated through that whole thing, didn't you? The actual Cruz quotes didn't support any of their hate filled leftist drivel.

you have a rich fantasy life.
false it's more than enough evidence to show his bad wiring.

 

[Uncensored2008]

another thing you an expert in, being flaccid!

There is a reason we call you duhs!

 

[daws101]

Conservatism as a Mental Illness
Republican pols have recently exhibited 10 telltale signs of mental illness.
Published on June 12, 2012 by Barry X. Kuhle, Ph.D. in Evolutionary Entertainment

In Creationism as a Mental Illness, Robert Rowland Smith argues that creationists exhibit several signs of mental illness including denial, psychosis, and inability to grasp irony.

The specter of mental illness does indeed loom large over creationists, but they are not alone. Signs of psychopathology can also be seen among their political bedfellows, conservative politicians, especially when you consider a wide range of illness indicators. In his award-winning 2005 book, Dr. James Whitney Hicks discusses 50 signs of mental illness including denial, delusion, hallucination, disordered thinking, anger, anti-social behavior, sexual preoccupation, grandiosity, general oddness, and paranoia. Now I'm no clinician, but in my (admittedly biased brown) eyes it seems that prominent Republicans have evidenced each of these ten telltale signs of mental illness over the past year:

1) Denial: humans did not evolve; Obama is not a native-born American Christian
2) Delusion: climate is not changing
3) Hallucination: God ordained me to be President
4) Disordered Thinking: being for small government that's huge in the bedroom; being anti-contraception and anti-abortion
5) Anger: Newt Gingrich’s perpetual scowl
6) Anti-social Behavior: toward women, gays, minorities, anyone without an umbilical cord or trust fund
7) Sexual Preoccupation: a fervent compulsion to control when we can mate, with whom we can mate, and precisely how we are allowed to mate (which I lampoon in Why Do Politicians Want to Police Dick and Jane's Private Parts?)
8) Grandiosity: even Rick Santorum recognizes Gingrich’s “over the moon” grandiosity
9) General Oddness: Ron Paul
10) Paranoia: pretty much all of them, all of the time
Even (the not necessarily dumb) Pope Francis appears to recognize that “it is a serious illness, this of ideological [conservative] Christians. It is an illness, but it is not new, eh?”
Until Jon Huntsman becomes the sane voice of his insane party, maybe "Republican Syndrome" should be added to the DSM-V so that crazy conservative pols can receive the mental health treatment they need. I bet "Obamacare" would even cover it.

• See also Conservatism as a Mental Illness, Part II: Does the GOP Suffer from MSBP?

• 
  Conservatism as a Mental Illness Psychology Today

ROFLMNAO!

I guess I'll never tire of watching the Left cry about 'evolution', even as their every 'feeling' results in the devolution of human reasoning.

LOL! You can NOT make this crap up.

odd! it's the right that does not use reason or logic.
true! no one person made this up it was taken from observation of the right.