NY Times Proudly Proclaims America Should be Governed by Mob Rule

[danielpalos]

Higher paid labor pays more in taxes and creates more in demand. Yes, we keep going over this.

Paying people who are not working and who have not qualified for unemployment insurance payments is welfare. That's the bottoms line. Be honest, you want to get money from somewhere even if you can work but choose not to.

it is more cost effective than welfare. and employment is at-will. it is equal protection of the law.

No, it's welfare. Be honest.

ok. The Power to provide for the General Welfare is in our Constitution; stop appealing to emotion regarding the Term welfare; be Patriotic.

It does NOT mean what you claim it means.

you don't know what you are talking about.

 

[Uncensored2008]

In all seriousness there is far too much smoke for there to be no fire. You just refuse to see because you are a rwnj hack.

There is no smoke creepazoid, just hatred and rage from you fucking Nazi piles of shit due to you losing the power of an activist court.

 

[Cecilie1200]

This.. View attachment 220997

The one time I agreed with Hillary. Couple that with Obama’s “Elections have consequences”. Why don’t the Democrats listen and adhere to the standards and edicts of their leaders?

You could answer that question by understanding those who still think 3 million illegals voted.

Prove they didn't.

Thanks for helping show how people wont accept elections. There is a practical aspect as well: illegals never want to take actions which would attract law enforcement.

• News21, a national investigative reporting project funded by the Carnegie Corporation of New York and the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation, found just 56 cases of noncitizens voting between 2000 and 2011.

• A report by the liberal Brennan Center for Justice at New York University School of Law found that most cases of noncitizens voting were accidental. "Although there are a few recorded examples in which noncitizens have apparently registered or voted, investigators have concluded that they were likely not aware that doing so was improper," reads the 2007 report.

• In 2012, Florida Gov. Rick Scott’s administration started an effort trying to crack down on noncitizens voting by comparing driver's license data against voter rolls. The Florida Department of State created a list of 182,000 potential noncitizens that had voted. That number was whittled down to 2,700, then to about 200 before the purge was stopped amid criticism that the data was flawed given the number of false positives — including a Brooklyn-born World War II vet. Ultimately, only 85 people were removed from the rolls.

Meanwhile, ProPublica, an investigative journalism project, tweeted that "we had 1,100 people monitoring the vote on Election Day. We saw no evidence the election was ‘rigged’ " and "no evidence that undocumented immigrants voted illegally."

Oh my, some lying media pukes saw "no evidence"! I am astounded! Non citizens voting were "accidental". Oh my! It's an accident!

How do you "accidentally" go into a polling place and "accidentally" get a ballot and "accidentally" fill it out?

 

[Cecilie1200]

`
While I'm sure you didn't read the entire article (I did) I found the author, Michael Tomasky, logic to be wanting. While I agree that the high court has been rigged with an evangelical, so-called catholic, right winger, I don't agree that SCOTUS should represent a mob, which pretty much sums up the reaction of the far left to Kavanaugh's election.

The ideological make up of the Supreme Court in the Dred Scott case had nothing to do with it's decision.

That is an incredibly ignorant claim.

The divide at that time was not abortion, but slavery. Still the democrats of that time were just as violent and hate filled as democrats today.l The decision was the imposition of democrat will on a legislature that would not pass that sort of law.

The "democrats of that time" are the REPUBLICANS of today! Perhaps you need to learn some American history from somewhere other than Faux News or Breitbart.

And you have the audacity to say someone said something "incredibly ignorant"….

Ahhh, yet another bullshit talking point. Perhaps YOU need to learn some history from . . . you know, an actual history class with actual historical sources.

And you have the audacity to use the word "ignorant" at all.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I know you would prefer everyone just keep their mouths shut and let the Republicans do as they will, but ... hullo .... no, people aren't going to do that, and I do wish you folks would quit whining so much about it. It isn't manly.

Violent thugs in a restaurant screaming at people seated at a table is assault, not protest.

You Nazis are violent thugs - period.

Basically, if you're behaving in a way in which you would not want to see people behave toward you, you're an ass kitten, and you need to stop trying to tell us how it's "just protest" when you do it.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Who said we've got "mob rule?" That's what you're going to call the left, now, when they protest, huh, "mobs?" Oh, that will bring over a few Independents and Democrats for sure.

Why? Who would want to join a screaming mob, except the screaming mob? They look like the idiots they are.

Riots are more likely..........seems the Dems protest riot police and buses to haul off those to jail are needed every time. It is one thing to protest PEACEFULLY and entirely another to use violence as a means for political ends............

Time and time again the left use intimidation and fear tactics on their protests..........when they don't get their way or when they are offended and they try to trample the Freedom of those who speak against them............ANTIFA and BLM being prime examples..........brandishing metal clubs with homemade body armor going to crack heads of those they disagree with............

That isn't a Peaceful Protest................that is an intent to incite violence.

Wake up. It's both sides. You all will be back with your AR's on your shoulders as soon as you lose.

Anti Muslim Crusaders...........which I am not a part of ..........Are you part of Antifa...........BLM.............who are violent to the core.

Do you start riots at Trump rallies.............are you following Republicans to gas stations and harassing them.........at the movies.........are you trying to scare Collins going to work by chanting and yelling at her.....................

You are as much a part of those groups as I am part of the Crusaders.................In regards to when we lose...........TEA PARTY.........You bet. But they didn't go there and burn the town down to the ground...........and didn't silence the opposition...........Police were there........but didn't have to do mass arrests..........now did they.

How many times do I have to remind you that NO ONE has burned any town down to the ground. I don't hear you guys being silenced in the least. CNN had equal representation last night, as a matter of fact, Kavanaugh supporters and those against. But they were totally matter of fact about it, not insulting or asking for violence.

Tell you what, you excuse-spewing hypocrite. Why don't you tell us what you would be calling this sort of behavior if Republicans did it? Tell me how, if Republicans started chasing Kamala frigging Harris through the halls of Congress, screeching at her, you'd be shrugging it off as "just protest". How, if yelling crowds of people descended on Dianne Feinstein while she was eating dinner in a restaurant and forced her to leave, you'd think they were "just expressing themselves".

Or more likely, you're going to try to come up with some jackass, lame excuse - out of your endless bag of such - as to why it's "diferent" when Republicans do it, because REASONS.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Riots are more likely..........seems the Dems protest riot police and buses to haul off those to jail are needed every time. It is one thing to protest PEACEFULLY and entirely another to use violence as a means for political ends............

Time and time again the left use intimidation and fear tactics on their protests..........when they don't get their way or when they are offended and they try to trample the Freedom of those who speak against them............ANTIFA and BLM being prime examples..........brandishing metal clubs with homemade body armor going to crack heads of those they disagree with............

That isn't a Peaceful Protest................that is an intent to incite violence.

Wake up. It's both sides. You all will be back with your AR's on your shoulders as soon as you lose.

Anti Muslim Crusaders...........which I am not a part of ..........Are you part of Antifa...........BLM.............who are violent to the core.

Do you start riots at Trump rallies.............are you following Republicans to gas stations and harassing them.........at the movies.........are you trying to scare Collins going to work by chanting and yelling at her.....................

You are as much a part of those groups as I am part of the Crusaders.................In regards to when we lose...........TEA PARTY.........You bet. But they didn't go there and burn the town down to the ground...........and didn't silence the opposition...........Police were there........but didn't have to do mass arrests..........now did they.

How many times do I have to remind you that NO ONE has burned any town down to the ground. I don't hear you guys being silenced in the least. CNN had equal representation last night, as a matter of fact, Kavanaugh supporters and those against. But they were totally matter of fact about it, not insulting or asking for violence.

Do you go through life with blinders on and have not seen the riots and burning in cities due to the riots.............Have you not seen the violence from Antifa and places like Berkley..............the riot police .......tear gas and the likes..........

Have you not seen protesters shutting down roads for people just going to a Trump Rally...........have you not seen project Veratas showing paid protesters going to a rally to start shit and violence...............

70 protesters were thrown out and arrested during the confirmation of Kav the very first day..........in the confirmations under Obama I think the number was 3 who were pro life protesters................

If you cannot see the violence from the left...............then you are kidding yourself.

OldLady thinks it's still 1965 and her Maoist revolution will usher in a new era where all are equally enslaved. The rioters in Ferguson and elsewhere are "freedom fighters" to her.

Of course, if those "terrifying" Republicans who are "threateningly" standing around doing nothing in her picture were to do a Ferguson, THEN they would be a "mob" and she'd be decrying them from the rooftops. Not because the behavior is any different, but because anything is okay if it's done by leftists, no matter how much she wants to lie and make excuses so that she can pretend to herself that she's some kind of actual person.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Riots are more likely..........seems the Dems protest riot police and buses to haul off those to jail are needed every time. It is one thing to protest PEACEFULLY and entirely another to use violence as a means for political ends............

Time and time again the left use intimidation and fear tactics on their protests..........when they don't get their way or when they are offended and they try to trample the Freedom of those who speak against them............ANTIFA and BLM being prime examples..........brandishing metal clubs with homemade body armor going to crack heads of those they disagree with............

That isn't a Peaceful Protest................that is an intent to incite violence.

Wake up. It's both sides. You all will be back with your AR's on your shoulders as soon as you lose.

Anti Muslim Crusaders...........which I am not a part of ..........Are you part of Antifa...........BLM.............who are violent to the core.

Do you start riots at Trump rallies.............are you following Republicans to gas stations and harassing them.........at the movies.........are you trying to scare Collins going to work by chanting and yelling at her.....................

You are as much a part of those groups as I am part of the Crusaders.................In regards to when we lose...........TEA PARTY.........You bet. But they didn't go there and burn the town down to the ground...........and didn't silence the opposition...........Police were there........but didn't have to do mass arrests..........now did they.

How many times do I have to remind you that NO ONE has burned any town down to the ground. I don't hear you guys being silenced in the least. CNN had equal representation last night, as a matter of fact, Kavanaugh supporters and those against. But they were totally matter of fact about it, not insulting or asking for violence.

I'll let the residents of Ferguson know, Comrade Nazi. No doubt it will comfort them as they sift through the ashes of their homes and businesses.

Stop lying. 17 businesses were burned to the point of being "unsafe." Yes, riots suck. But they did not burn any town to the ground, and every time I catch you saying that I will remind that that did not happen.

"Oh, only a LITTLE bit of the city got burned. Don't talk like it was a BAD thing. It's not like it was REPUBLICANS doing it."

 

[Cecilie1200]

So when an overwhelming majority in California voted to ban gay marriage the NY Times now supports the ban?

California took care of that by ending free and fair elections.

The left ran to the courts screaming about that vote of the people and got it overturned in the courts. The left are all for mob rule when the outcome pleases them, when it doesn't they champion minority rule.

That's because the only rule they're REALLY in favor of is their own.

 

[miketx]

The one time I agreed with Hillary. Couple that with Obama’s “Elections have consequences”. Why don’t the Democrats listen and adhere to the standards and edicts of their leaders?

You could answer that question by understanding those who still think 3 million illegals voted.

Prove they didn't.

Thanks for helping show how people wont accept elections. There is a practical aspect as well: illegals never want to take actions which would attract law enforcement.

• News21, a national investigative reporting project funded by the Carnegie Corporation of New York and the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation, found just 56 cases of noncitizens voting between 2000 and 2011.

• A report by the liberal Brennan Center for Justice at New York University School of Law found that most cases of noncitizens voting were accidental. "Although there are a few recorded examples in which noncitizens have apparently registered or voted, investigators have concluded that they were likely not aware that doing so was improper," reads the 2007 report.

• In 2012, Florida Gov. Rick Scott’s administration started an effort trying to crack down on noncitizens voting by comparing driver's license data against voter rolls. The Florida Department of State created a list of 182,000 potential noncitizens that had voted. That number was whittled down to 2,700, then to about 200 before the purge was stopped amid criticism that the data was flawed given the number of false positives — including a Brooklyn-born World War II vet. Ultimately, only 85 people were removed from the rolls.

Meanwhile, ProPublica, an investigative journalism project, tweeted that "we had 1,100 people monitoring the vote on Election Day. We saw no evidence the election was ‘rigged’ " and "no evidence that undocumented immigrants voted illegally."

Oh my, some lying media pukes saw "no evidence"! I am astounded! Non citizens voting were "accidental". Oh my! It's an accident!

How do you "accidentally" go into a polling place and "accidentally" get a ballot and "accidentally" fill it out?

Ask the lying media.

 

[Cecilie1200]

You could answer that question by understanding those who still think 3 million illegals voted.

Prove they didn't.

Thanks for helping show how people wont accept elections. There is a practical aspect as well: illegals never want to take actions which would attract law enforcement.

• News21, a national investigative reporting project funded by the Carnegie Corporation of New York and the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation, found just 56 cases of noncitizens voting between 2000 and 2011.

• A report by the liberal Brennan Center for Justice at New York University School of Law found that most cases of noncitizens voting were accidental. "Although there are a few recorded examples in which noncitizens have apparently registered or voted, investigators have concluded that they were likely not aware that doing so was improper," reads the 2007 report.

• In 2012, Florida Gov. Rick Scott’s administration started an effort trying to crack down on noncitizens voting by comparing driver's license data against voter rolls. The Florida Department of State created a list of 182,000 potential noncitizens that had voted. That number was whittled down to 2,700, then to about 200 before the purge was stopped amid criticism that the data was flawed given the number of false positives — including a Brooklyn-born World War II vet. Ultimately, only 85 people were removed from the rolls.

Meanwhile, ProPublica, an investigative journalism project, tweeted that "we had 1,100 people monitoring the vote on Election Day. We saw no evidence the election was ‘rigged’ " and "no evidence that undocumented immigrants voted illegally."

Oh my, some lying media pukes saw "no evidence"! I am astounded! Non citizens voting were "accidental". Oh my! It's an accident!

How do you "accidentally" go into a polling place and "accidentally" get a ballot and "accidentally" fill it out?

Ask the lying media.

Thanks, but if I want to be deluged in lame lies, I'll go find a teenager and ask him to explain why he's out after curfew. At least THOSE lame lies will be creative and entertaining.

 

[DOTR]

While I'm sure you didn't read the entire article (I did) I found the author, Michael Tomasky, logic to be wanting. While I agree that the high court has been rigged with an evangelical, so-called catholic, right winger, I don't agree that SCOTUS should represent a mob, which pretty much sums up the reaction of the far left to Kavanaugh's election.The ideological make up of the Supreme Court in the Dred Scott decision had nothing to do with it's decision.

Tomasky is consistently one of the more reliably hardcore partisans out there. Just as with his hardcore right wing brethren, he's a good barometer of what the wings are thinking.
.

That wing controls the party. That wing is who goes into office when you check “D” on the ballot. Him and all 73 genders.

 

[hadit]

No, it's welfare. Be honest.

ok. The Power to provide for the General Welfare is in our Constitution; stop appealing to emotion regarding the Term welfare; be Patriotic.

Call it what it is. Being honest about that is your first step back to sanity.

I am advocating for, promoting and providing for the general welfare to solve the problem of Capitalism's natural rate of unemployment that merely benefits capitalists and not Labor.

And you took a step backwards. You're advocating for more welfare. Remember, being honest about that is your first step.

sorry; i am not appealing to emotion regarding welfare. i gave you every opportunity to prove your economic points.

only social points now;

how would anyone in our republic be worse off by solving for simple poverty?

you are welcome to any social thought exercises you want. you have no economic argument.

As long as you insist on redefining words to mean things they do not, you will never advance.

 

[danielpalos]

ok. The Power to provide for the General Welfare is in our Constitution; stop appealing to emotion regarding the Term welfare; be Patriotic.

Call it what it is. Being honest about that is your first step back to sanity.

I am advocating for, promoting and providing for the general welfare to solve the problem of Capitalism's natural rate of unemployment that merely benefits capitalists and not Labor.

And you took a step backwards. You're advocating for more welfare. Remember, being honest about that is your first step.

sorry; i am not appealing to emotion regarding welfare. i gave you every opportunity to prove your economic points.

only social points now;

how would anyone in our republic be worse off by solving for simple poverty?

you are welcome to any social thought exercises you want. you have no economic argument.

As long as you insist on redefining words to mean things they do not, you will never advance.

i am citing our federal Constitution. The power to provide for the general welfare expressly declared general not limited.

 

[Uncensored2008]

The "democrats of that time" are the REPUBLICANS of today! Perhaps you need to learn some American history from somewhere other than Faux News or Breitbart.

And you have the audacity to say someone said something "incredibly ignorant"….

What a fucking retard.

No shit fer brains, the democrats of the time were democrats.

What is it with you drooling fucks that makes you think you can just lie reality out of existence?

------------------------

Odummy:Hhhhey Cleetus, heyyyy Cleetus, Cleetussss.

Cleetus: What you fucking retard?

Odummy: Da Republicans keep pointing out how we democrats had slaves.

Cleetus: then just fucking lie and claim it was really them

Odummy: ewe sew smurt Cleetus...

 

[Dr Grump]

You Yanks and your politics. LOL...

 

[miketx]

You Yanks and your politics. LOL...

You foreigners and your Muslims. Enjoy your acid bath.

 

[Dr Grump]

You Yanks and your politics. LOL...

You foreigners and your Muslims. Enjoy your acid bath.

You neocons whackos and your empty rhetoric.

 

[hadit]

Call it what it is. Being honest about that is your first step back to sanity.

I am advocating for, promoting and providing for the general welfare to solve the problem of Capitalism's natural rate of unemployment that merely benefits capitalists and not Labor.

And you took a step backwards. You're advocating for more welfare. Remember, being honest about that is your first step.

sorry; i am not appealing to emotion regarding welfare. i gave you every opportunity to prove your economic points.

only social points now;

how would anyone in our republic be worse off by solving for simple poverty?

you are welcome to any social thought exercises you want. you have no economic argument.

As long as you insist on redefining words to mean things they do not, you will never advance.

i am citing our federal Constitution. The power to provide for the general welfare expressly declared general not limited.

Then be honest and say you want welfare. Quit trying to dress it up by saying it's unemployment.

 

[danielpalos]

I am advocating for, promoting and providing for the general welfare to solve the problem of Capitalism's natural rate of unemployment that merely benefits capitalists and not Labor.

And you took a step backwards. You're advocating for more welfare. Remember, being honest about that is your first step.

sorry; i am not appealing to emotion regarding welfare. i gave you every opportunity to prove your economic points.

only social points now;

how would anyone in our republic be worse off by solving for simple poverty?

you are welcome to any social thought exercises you want. you have no economic argument.

As long as you insist on redefining words to mean things they do not, you will never advance.

i am citing our federal Constitution. The power to provide for the general welfare expressly declared general not limited.

Then be honest and say you want welfare. Quit trying to dress it up by saying it's unemployment.

we have a means tested welfare program. I am advocating we use an existing public policy scheme of unemployment compensation to solve simple poverty in our Republic.