Uncomfortable FACT about Mayor de Blasio for conservatives...

[LordBrownTrout]

Just so we get this fact clear going forward...

YOU folks on the right are supporting a UNION. And not just any union, a PUBLIC sector union.

However you want to twist it, that is an irrefutable FACT...


"In general, it can probably be said that the conservative does not object to coercion or arbitrary power so long as it is used for what he regards as the right purposes. He believes that if government is in the hands of decent men, it ought not to be too much restricted by rigid rules. Since he is essentially opportunist and lacks principles..."
Friedrich August von Hayek-Why I am Not a Conservative

Absolutely not. Their public union is as corrupt as blasio.

 

[bripat9643]

Social Darwinism is WHOLLY owned by the right...

The Tea Parties Bring Back Social Darwinism
The right-wing populism manifested in the movement is essentially the same old Social Darwinism that appeared in U.S. society in the nineteenth century.

Sumner believed that the fundamental law of the universe was survival of the fittest. So progressivism or socialism or any ideology that aimed to “save individuals from any of the difficulties or hardships of the struggle for existence” was pure folly. Like today’s right-wing populist revolt, Sumner’s brand of Social Darwinism propagated an unabashed but seamless defense of two groups that would seem to be at odds: the Captain of Industry and the Forgotten Man.

For Sumner, both of these figurative “men” had more to fear from the paternal state than they did from each other. Take the Captain of Industry. For Sumner, society depended on the creation of individual wealth; thus, social advancement for all depended on the financial abilities of the few. “If we should set a limit to the accumulation of wealth,” he wrote, “we should say to our most valued producers, ‘We do not want you to do us the services which you best understand how to perform, beyond a certain point.’ It would be like killing off our generals in a war.”

Is social darwinism the new catch phrase by socialists to smear capitalism? Our country was founded by capitalists, with a capitalist economic system and we've done pretty good with it. More than a few have prospered.

What I don't understand about liberals is why they cry about the unfairness of capitalism, how oppressive it is and all that, BUT people from foreign lands, taking big risks and dying to get here, can and often do very well. Some barely speak the language but they know opportunity when the see it and take advantage of it.

Why don't you liberals place your failures where they belong? On yourselves.

Our country was founded by men who vehemently opposed oppression, by a King AND equally by huge multinational corporations. The Boston Tea Party was a protest against huge corporate tax cuts for the British East India Company, the largest trans-national corporation then in existence. This corporate tax cut threatened to decimate small Colonial businesses by helping the BEIC pull a Wal-Mart against small entrepreneurial tea shops, and individuals began a revolt that kicked-off a series of events that ended in the creation of The United States of America.

Our founding fathers heavily regulated early corporations and shut down any corporation who did not serve the public good.


The selfish spirit of commerce knows no country, and feels no passion or principle but that of gain.
Thomas Jefferson - Letter to Larkin Smith (1809)

Only an idiot would claim a similarity between Walmart and the British East India Company. The later had a government granted monopoly. At the Boston Tea Party the conolonist were not revolting against a cut in British taxes on tea. They were protesting the Kings decision to impose an increase in the tax on Tea. It's a perfect example of exactly the kind of government favoritism that liberals love.

Aside from displaying your total ignorance of history, your post was informative.

You are totally wrong. They were protesting law passed that exempted BEIC from tea taxes, allowing it to wipe out New England-based tea wholesalers and mom-and-pop stores and take over the tea business in all of America. If the colonists were only concerned with what they as individuals would pay for tea, there would have been no tea party.

It's actually more complicated than that.

Tea Act - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

The Tea Act of 1773 (13 Geo 3 c 44) was an Act of the Parliament of Great Britain. Its principal overt objective was to reduce the massive surplus of tea held by the financially troubled British East India Company in its London warehouses and to help the struggling company survive. A related objective was to undercut the price of illegal tea, smuggled into Britain's North American colonies. This was supposed to convince the colonists to purchase Company tea on which the Townshend duties were paid, thus implicitly agreeing to accept Parliament's right of taxation. The Act granted the Company the right to directly ship its tea to North America and the right to the duty-free export of tea from Britain, although the tax imposed by the Townshend Acts and collected in the colonies remained in force. It received the royal assent on May 10, 1773.
​

However, the fact remains, Walmart bears no resemblance to The British East India Company. Walmart is not a government enforced monopoly. It's a business that has to compete with other businesses providing the same products and services.

 

[Bfgrn]

Social Darwinism is WHOLLY owned by the right...

The Tea Parties Bring Back Social Darwinism
The right-wing populism manifested in the movement is essentially the same old Social Darwinism that appeared in U.S. society in the nineteenth century.

Sumner believed that the fundamental law of the universe was survival of the fittest. So progressivism or socialism or any ideology that aimed to “save individuals from any of the difficulties or hardships of the struggle for existence” was pure folly. Like today’s right-wing populist revolt, Sumner’s brand of Social Darwinism propagated an unabashed but seamless defense of two groups that would seem to be at odds: the Captain of Industry and the Forgotten Man.

For Sumner, both of these figurative “men” had more to fear from the paternal state than they did from each other. Take the Captain of Industry. For Sumner, society depended on the creation of individual wealth; thus, social advancement for all depended on the financial abilities of the few. “If we should set a limit to the accumulation of wealth,” he wrote, “we should say to our most valued producers, ‘We do not want you to do us the services which you best understand how to perform, beyond a certain point.’ It would be like killing off our generals in a war.”

Is social darwinism the new catch phrase by socialists to smear capitalism? Our country was founded by capitalists, with a capitalist economic system and we've done pretty good with it. More than a few have prospered.

What I don't understand about liberals is why they cry about the unfairness of capitalism, how oppressive it is and all that, BUT people from foreign lands, taking big risks and dying to get here, can and often do very well. Some barely speak the language but they know opportunity when the see it and take advantage of it.

Why don't you liberals place your failures where they belong? On yourselves.

Our country was founded by men who vehemently opposed oppression, by a King AND equally by huge multinational corporations. The Boston Tea Party was a protest against huge corporate tax cuts for the British East India Company, the largest trans-national corporation then in existence. This corporate tax cut threatened to decimate small Colonial businesses by helping the BEIC pull a Wal-Mart against small entrepreneurial tea shops, and individuals began a revolt that kicked-off a series of events that ended in the creation of The United States of America.

Our founding fathers heavily regulated early corporations and shut down any corporation who did not serve the public good.


The selfish spirit of commerce knows no country, and feels no passion or principle but that of gain.
Thomas Jefferson - Letter to Larkin Smith (1809)

Only an idiot would claim a similarity between Walmart and the British East India Company. The later had a government granted monopoly. At the Boston Tea Party the conolonist were not revolting against a cut in British taxes on tea. They were protesting the Kings decision to impose an increase in the tax on Tea. It's a perfect example of exactly the kind of government favoritism that liberals love.

Aside from displaying your total ignorance of history, your post was informative.

You are totally wrong. They were protesting law passed that exempted BEIC from tea taxes, allowing it to wipe out New England-based tea wholesalers and mom-and-pop stores and take over the tea business in all of America. If the colonists were only concerned with what they as individuals would pay for tea, there would have been no tea party.

It's actually more complicated than that.

Tea Act - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

The Tea Act of 1773 (13 Geo 3 c 44) was an Act of the Parliament of Great Britain. Its principal overt objective was to reduce the massive surplus of tea held by the financially troubled British East India Company in its London warehouses and to help the struggling company survive. A related objective was to undercut the price of illegal tea, smuggled into Britain's North American colonies. This was supposed to convince the colonists to purchase Company tea on which the Townshend duties were paid, thus implicitly agreeing to accept Parliament's right of taxation. The Act granted the Company the right to directly ship its tea to North America and the right to the duty-free export of tea from Britain, although the tax imposed by the Townshend Acts and collected in the colonies remained in force. It received the royal assent on May 10, 1773.
​

However, the fact remains, Walmart bears no resemblance to The British East India Company. Walmart is not a government enforced monopoly. It's a business that has to compete with other businesses providing the same products and services.

You are not old enough to know America before Walmart. Walmart is in essence a government enforced monopoly. American taxpayers are on the hook for about $900,000 in subsidies per store.

The problem isn't just big government, it is BIG in general. Unfortunately you folks on the right are totally blind to any other big...

 

[bripat9643]

Is social darwinism the new catch phrase by socialists to smear capitalism? Our country was founded by capitalists, with a capitalist economic system and we've done pretty good with it. More than a few have prospered.

What I don't understand about liberals is why they cry about the unfairness of capitalism, how oppressive it is and all that, BUT people from foreign lands, taking big risks and dying to get here, can and often do very well. Some barely speak the language but they know opportunity when the see it and take advantage of it.

Why don't you liberals place your failures where they belong? On yourselves.

Our country was founded by men who vehemently opposed oppression, by a King AND equally by huge multinational corporations. The Boston Tea Party was a protest against huge corporate tax cuts for the British East India Company, the largest trans-national corporation then in existence. This corporate tax cut threatened to decimate small Colonial businesses by helping the BEIC pull a Wal-Mart against small entrepreneurial tea shops, and individuals began a revolt that kicked-off a series of events that ended in the creation of The United States of America.

Our founding fathers heavily regulated early corporations and shut down any corporation who did not serve the public good.


The selfish spirit of commerce knows no country, and feels no passion or principle but that of gain.
Thomas Jefferson - Letter to Larkin Smith (1809)

Only an idiot would claim a similarity between Walmart and the British East India Company. The later had a government granted monopoly. At the Boston Tea Party the conolonist were not revolting against a cut in British taxes on tea. They were protesting the Kings decision to impose an increase in the tax on Tea. It's a perfect example of exactly the kind of government favoritism that liberals love.

Aside from displaying your total ignorance of history, your post was informative.

You are totally wrong. They were protesting law passed that exempted BEIC from tea taxes, allowing it to wipe out New England-based tea wholesalers and mom-and-pop stores and take over the tea business in all of America. If the colonists were only concerned with what they as individuals would pay for tea, there would have been no tea party.

It's actually more complicated than that.

Tea Act - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

The Tea Act of 1773 (13 Geo 3 c 44) was an Act of the Parliament of Great Britain. Its principal overt objective was to reduce the massive surplus of tea held by the financially troubled British East India Company in its London warehouses and to help the struggling company survive. A related objective was to undercut the price of illegal tea, smuggled into Britain's North American colonies. This was supposed to convince the colonists to purchase Company tea on which the Townshend duties were paid, thus implicitly agreeing to accept Parliament's right of taxation. The Act granted the Company the right to directly ship its tea to North America and the right to the duty-free export of tea from Britain, although the tax imposed by the Townshend Acts and collected in the colonies remained in force. It received the royal assent on May 10, 1773.
​

However, the fact remains, Walmart bears no resemblance to The British East India Company. Walmart is not a government enforced monopoly. It's a business that has to compete with other businesses providing the same products and services.

You are not old enough to know America before Walmart. Walmart is in essence a government enforced monopoly. American taxpayers are on the hook for about $900,000 in subsidies per store.

That's pure communist horseshit propaganda.

The problem isn't just big government, it is BIG in general. Unfortunately you folks on the right are totally blind to any other big...

Government is 1000 times more of a threat than any big company. For one thing, the former can use guns to make you do what it wants. The later can't.

 

[Iceweasel]

You are not old enough to know America before Walmart. Walmart is in essence a government enforced monopoly. American taxpayers are on the hook for about $900,000 in subsidies per store.

The problem isn't just big government, it is BIG in general. Unfortunately you folks on the right are totally blind to any other big...

If a store gets a 900k tax deduction it would be because the local government is raking in more than that from taxes collected from employees and goods. Government didn't put Walmart on the map, their customers did.

I don't get the boner you lefties have with Walmart anyway. GM got our money and hasn't payed it all back yet, last I checked. Where's the outrage?

 

[Bfgrn]

You are not old enough to know America before Walmart. Walmart is in essence a government enforced monopoly. American taxpayers are on the hook for about $900,000 in subsidies per store.

The problem isn't just big government, it is BIG in general. Unfortunately you folks on the right are totally blind to any other big...

If a store gets a 900k tax deduction it would be because the local government is raking in more than that from taxes collected from employees and goods. Government didn't put Walmart on the map, their customers did.

I don't get the boner you lefties have with Walmart anyway. GM got our money and hasn't payed it all back yet, last I checked. Where's the outrage?

Those tax payer subsidies to Walmart are not loans. They are public assistance programs that Walmart workers need to make up for low wages.

It isn't just Walmart, it is the big box stores that have taken over. In the '50's and '60's America was a hotbed of small local businesses. It was diverse, truly entrepreneurial and there was actual local owners you knew by name, were part of the community and had a stake in the success or failure of the local economy.

We all understand the pitfalls of absentee owners when it comes to housing, but you folks on the right are blind to those pitfalls in business.

For people who claim Adam Smith as an icon, you certainly don't have any idea what he said.

 

[CowboyTed]

Our country was founded by men who vehemently opposed oppression, by a King AND equally by huge multinational corporations. The Boston Tea Party was a protest against huge corporate tax cuts for the British East India Company, the largest trans-national corporation then in existence. This corporate tax cut threatened to decimate small Colonial businesses by helping the BEIC pull a Wal-Mart against small entrepreneurial tea shops, and individuals began a revolt that kicked-off a series of events that ended in the creation of The United States of America.

Our founding fathers heavily regulated early corporations and shut down any corporation who did not serve the public good.


The selfish spirit of commerce knows no country, and feels no passion or principle but that of gain.
Thomas Jefferson - Letter to Larkin Smith (1809)

Only an idiot would claim a similarity between Walmart and the British East India Company. The later had a government granted monopoly. At the Boston Tea Party the conolonist were not revolting against a cut in British taxes on tea. They were protesting the Kings decision to impose an increase in the tax on Tea. It's a perfect example of exactly the kind of government favoritism that liberals love.

Aside from displaying your total ignorance of history, your post was informative.

You are totally wrong. They were protesting law passed that exempted BEIC from tea taxes, allowing it to wipe out New England-based tea wholesalers and mom-and-pop stores and take over the tea business in all of America. If the colonists were only concerned with what they as individuals would pay for tea, there would have been no tea party.

It's actually more complicated than that.

Tea Act - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

The Tea Act of 1773 (13 Geo 3 c 44) was an Act of the Parliament of Great Britain. Its principal overt objective was to reduce the massive surplus of tea held by the financially troubled British East India Company in its London warehouses and to help the struggling company survive. A related objective was to undercut the price of illegal tea, smuggled into Britain's North American colonies. This was supposed to convince the colonists to purchase Company tea on which the Townshend duties were paid, thus implicitly agreeing to accept Parliament's right of taxation. The Act granted the Company the right to directly ship its tea to North America and the right to the duty-free export of tea from Britain, although the tax imposed by the Townshend Acts and collected in the colonies remained in force. It received the royal assent on May 10, 1773.
​

However, the fact remains, Walmart bears no resemblance to The British East India Company. Walmart is not a government enforced monopoly. It's a business that has to compete with other businesses providing the same products and services.

You are not old enough to know America before Walmart. Walmart is in essence a government enforced monopoly. American taxpayers are on the hook for about $900,000 in subsidies per store.

That's pure communist horseshit propaganda.

The problem isn't just big government, it is BIG in general. Unfortunately you folks on the right are totally blind to any other big...

Government is 1000 times more of a threat than any big company. For one thing, the former can use guns to make you do what it wants. The later can't.

Britpat,

Again you just attack with no proof or counter argument?

Could you please provide proof to your assertion.

 

[Iceweasel]

You are not old enough to know America before Walmart. Walmart is in essence a government enforced monopoly. American taxpayers are on the hook for about $900,000 in subsidies per store.

The problem isn't just big government, it is BIG in general. Unfortunately you folks on the right are totally blind to any other big...

If a store gets a 900k tax deduction it would be because the local government is raking in more than that from taxes collected from employees and goods. Government didn't put Walmart on the map, their customers did.

I don't get the boner you lefties have with Walmart anyway. GM got our money and hasn't payed it all back yet, last I checked. Where's the outrage?

Those tax payer subsidies to Walmart are not loans. They are public assistance programs that Walmart workers need to make up for low wages.

It isn't just Walmart, it is the big box stores that have taken over. In the '50's and '60's America was a hotbed of small local businesses. It was diverse, truly entrepreneurial and there was actual local owners you knew by name, were part of the community and had a stake in the success or failure of the local economy.

We all understand the pitfalls of absentee owners when it comes to housing, but you folks on the right are blind to those pitfalls in business.

For people who claim Adam Smith as an icon, you certainly don't have any idea what he said.

I'm all for trimming down entitlements but your theory that it's just for Walmart is demonstrably wrong. I said nothing about Adam smith, are you hearing voices? I did say that American shoppers made Walmart what it is. Same with all successful companies. I like the mom and pop stores too but a government that controls the economy will be far worse than any Walmart. I can shop elsewhere, I can't select a different government.

 

[bripat9643]

Only an idiot would claim a similarity between Walmart and the British East India Company. The later had a government granted monopoly. At the Boston Tea Party the conolonist were not revolting against a cut in British taxes on tea. They were protesting the Kings decision to impose an increase in the tax on Tea. It's a perfect example of exactly the kind of government favoritism that liberals love.

Aside from displaying your total ignorance of history, your post was informative.

You are totally wrong. They were protesting law passed that exempted BEIC from tea taxes, allowing it to wipe out New England-based tea wholesalers and mom-and-pop stores and take over the tea business in all of America. If the colonists were only concerned with what they as individuals would pay for tea, there would have been no tea party.

It's actually more complicated than that.

Tea Act - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

The Tea Act of 1773 (13 Geo 3 c 44) was an Act of the Parliament of Great Britain. Its principal overt objective was to reduce the massive surplus of tea held by the financially troubled British East India Company in its London warehouses and to help the struggling company survive. A related objective was to undercut the price of illegal tea, smuggled into Britain's North American colonies. This was supposed to convince the colonists to purchase Company tea on which the Townshend duties were paid, thus implicitly agreeing to accept Parliament's right of taxation. The Act granted the Company the right to directly ship its tea to North America and the right to the duty-free export of tea from Britain, although the tax imposed by the Townshend Acts and collected in the colonies remained in force. It received the royal assent on May 10, 1773.
​

However, the fact remains, Walmart bears no resemblance to The British East India Company. Walmart is not a government enforced monopoly. It's a business that has to compete with other businesses providing the same products and services.

You are not old enough to know America before Walmart. Walmart is in essence a government enforced monopoly. American taxpayers are on the hook for about $900,000 in subsidies per store.

That's pure communist horseshit propaganda.

The problem isn't just big government, it is BIG in general. Unfortunately you folks on the right are totally blind to any other big...

Government is 1000 times more of a threat than any big company. For one thing, the former can use guns to make you do what it wants. The later can't.

Britpat,

Again you just attack with no proof or counter argument?

Could you please provide proof to your assertion.

I need to prove that government can use guns and kill people?

 

[Bfgrn]

You are not old enough to know America before Walmart. Walmart is in essence a government enforced monopoly. American taxpayers are on the hook for about $900,000 in subsidies per store.

The problem isn't just big government, it is BIG in general. Unfortunately you folks on the right are totally blind to any other big...

If a store gets a 900k tax deduction it would be because the local government is raking in more than that from taxes collected from employees and goods. Government didn't put Walmart on the map, their customers did.

I don't get the boner you lefties have with Walmart anyway. GM got our money and hasn't payed it all back yet, last I checked. Where's the outrage?

Those tax payer subsidies to Walmart are not loans. They are public assistance programs that Walmart workers need to make up for low wages.

It isn't just Walmart, it is the big box stores that have taken over. In the '50's and '60's America was a hotbed of small local businesses. It was diverse, truly entrepreneurial and there was actual local owners you knew by name, were part of the community and had a stake in the success or failure of the local economy.

We all understand the pitfalls of absentee owners when it comes to housing, but you folks on the right are blind to those pitfalls in business.

For people who claim Adam Smith as an icon, you certainly don't have any idea what he said.

I'm all for trimming down entitlements but your theory that it's just for Walmart is demonstrably wrong. I said nothing about Adam smith, are you hearing voices? I did say that American shoppers made Walmart what it is. Same with all successful companies. I like the mom and pop stores too but a government that controls the economy will be far worse than any Walmart. I can shop elsewhere, I can't select a different government.

I am not for trimming down entitlements for citizens, I am all for trimming down entitlements for corporations that manifest in the form of corporate welfare and cost externalization.

You didn't say anything about Adam Smith, and you don't demonstrate any knowledge of what Adam Smith said.

I am quite sure I might as well be talking in a foreign language when these topics are brought up.

 

[Iceweasel]

You are not old enough to know America before Walmart. Walmart is in essence a government enforced monopoly. American taxpayers are on the hook for about $900,000 in subsidies per store.

The problem isn't just big government, it is BIG in general. Unfortunately you folks on the right are totally blind to any other big...

If a store gets a 900k tax deduction it would be because the local government is raking in more than that from taxes collected from employees and goods. Government didn't put Walmart on the map, their customers did.

I don't get the boner you lefties have with Walmart anyway. GM got our money and hasn't payed it all back yet, last I checked. Where's the outrage?

Those tax payer subsidies to Walmart are not loans. They are public assistance programs that Walmart workers need to make up for low wages.

It isn't just Walmart, it is the big box stores that have taken over. In the '50's and '60's America was a hotbed of small local businesses. It was diverse, truly entrepreneurial and there was actual local owners you knew by name, were part of the community and had a stake in the success or failure of the local economy.

We all understand the pitfalls of absentee owners when it comes to housing, but you folks on the right are blind to those pitfalls in business.

For people who claim Adam Smith as an icon, you certainly don't have any idea what he said.

I'm all for trimming down entitlements but your theory that it's just for Walmart is demonstrably wrong. I said nothing about Adam smith, are you hearing voices? I did say that American shoppers made Walmart what it is. Same with all successful companies. I like the mom and pop stores too but a government that controls the economy will be far worse than any Walmart. I can shop elsewhere, I can't select a different government.

I am not for trimming down entitlements for citizens, I am all for trimming down entitlements for corporations that manifest in the form of corporate welfare and cost externalization.

You didn't say anything about Adam Smith, and you don't demonstrate any knowledge of what Adam Smith said.

I am quite sure I might as well be talking in a foreign language when these topics are brought up.

You can babble anywhere anytime, not my problem. I am pro business, I don't need your permission or Smith's, Tom, Dick or Harry. You are a cultist with someone you need to lead you. Conservatives do not base their fiscal philosophies on what someone else thinks, get it Einstein?

I said numerous times I'm against the GM croney capitalist union bailout. GE is another with their hands deep in government pockets as well as the green energy scam companies. Walmart is paying more than it collects from government, you don't know what you're talking about, you simply babble what you've been trained to think.

 

[Jarhead]

Just so we get this fact clear going forward...

YOU folks on the right are supporting a UNION. And not just any union, a PUBLIC sector union.

However you want to twist it, that is an irrefutable FACT...


"In general, it can probably be said that the conservative does not object to coercion or arbitrary power so long as it is used for what he regards as the right purposes. He believes that if government is in the hands of decent men, it ought not to be too much restricted by rigid rules. Since he is essentially opportunist and lacks principles..."
Friedrich August von Hayek-Why I am Not a Conservative

And...based on your premise....when you buy gasoline for your car you are supporting the oil companies.

What a childish argument you started here. LMAO...and you told US to spin it any way we want?

Really?

False equivalency. We are always hearing about "union thugs" from the right. Now, when we see REAL union thugs who swarm and choke a man to death, they are just doing their jobs, or some right wing turds blame Eric Garner. You folks are SCUM.

Nah. The only scum are those that wish to make something that is a non story into something that is divisive for political expediency.

 

[Jarhead]

It was a homicide — and the chokehold killed him.

Eric Garner, the Staten Island dad who complained that he couldn’t breathe as he was subdued by cops, died from compression of the neck, the medical examiner said Friday.

The autopsy also found that compressions to the chest and “prone positioning during physical restraint by police” killed Garner. The manner of death, according to the medical examiner, was homicide.

Eric Garner s death ruled a homicide NYC medical examiner - NY Daily News

It is deemed a homicide when the actions of another party causes the death. It is deemed a murder if the actions of the other person were not considered "warranted". It has since been deemed by pretty much anyone who does not have an agenda that it was not a choke hold, but a control hold. It was also deemed that if he were of a more normal weight and did not have asthma, he likely would not have died. And one thing we all know for sure....if he did not resist arrest there would have been no incident at all.
But please, continue with your baseless rant like a child. It is fun to watch.

 

[Jarhead]

I'm supporting police that happen to be in a union. Then nypd would be pissed at Mayor de Blasio even if there were no Union.

SO, you support a gang of thugs mauling an unarmed man, and choking him to death?

No. Although sadly, that happens quite often in New York...usually black on black crime....but it is what it is.
But no, I don't support a gang of thugs mauling an unarmed man and choking him to death.

But I do support police officers using control holds to take down a man who is resisting arrest...as was the case in the Garner incident.

 

[Bfgrn]

I'm supporting police that happen to be in a union. Then nypd would be pissed at Mayor de Blasio even if there were no Union.

SO, you support a gang of thugs mauling an unarmed man, and choking him to death?

No. Although sadly, that happens quite often in New York...usually black on black crime....but it is what it is.
But no, I don't support a gang of thugs mauling an unarmed man and choking him to death.

But I do support police officers using control holds to take down a man who is resisting arrest...as was the case in the Garner incident.

You folks have NOTHING that could be mistaken for human traits, Christian morals or human decency. You are authoritarian followers. You are the very same people who could carry out genocide

 

[Bfgrn]

You are not old enough to know America before Walmart. Walmart is in essence a government enforced monopoly. American taxpayers are on the hook for about $900,000 in subsidies per store.

The problem isn't just big government, it is BIG in general. Unfortunately you folks on the right are totally blind to any other big...

If a store gets a 900k tax deduction it would be because the local government is raking in more than that from taxes collected from employees and goods. Government didn't put Walmart on the map, their customers did.

I don't get the boner you lefties have with Walmart anyway. GM got our money and hasn't payed it all back yet, last I checked. Where's the outrage?

Those tax payer subsidies to Walmart are not loans. They are public assistance programs that Walmart workers need to make up for low wages.

It isn't just Walmart, it is the big box stores that have taken over. In the '50's and '60's America was a hotbed of small local businesses. It was diverse, truly entrepreneurial and there was actual local owners you knew by name, were part of the community and had a stake in the success or failure of the local economy.

We all understand the pitfalls of absentee owners when it comes to housing, but you folks on the right are blind to those pitfalls in business.

For people who claim Adam Smith as an icon, you certainly don't have any idea what he said.

I'm all for trimming down entitlements but your theory that it's just for Walmart is demonstrably wrong. I said nothing about Adam smith, are you hearing voices? I did say that American shoppers made Walmart what it is. Same with all successful companies. I like the mom and pop stores too but a government that controls the economy will be far worse than any Walmart. I can shop elsewhere, I can't select a different government.

I am not for trimming down entitlements for citizens, I am all for trimming down entitlements for corporations that manifest in the form of corporate welfare and cost externalization.

You didn't say anything about Adam Smith, and you don't demonstrate any knowledge of what Adam Smith said.

I am quite sure I might as well be talking in a foreign language when these topics are brought up.

You can babble anywhere anytime, not my problem. I am pro business, I don't need your permission or Smith's, Tom, Dick or Harry. You are a cultist with someone you need to lead you. Conservatives do not base their fiscal philosophies on what someone else thinks, get it Einstein?

I said numerous times I'm against the GM croney capitalist union bailout. GE is another with their hands deep in government pockets as well as the green energy scam companies. Walmart is paying more than it collects from government, you don't know what you're talking about, you simply babble what you've been trained to think.

Conservatives base their fiscal philosophy on:
A) Worship of a hierarchy who you are subservient to
B) Belief in 'magic', 'invisible hands' and 'voodoo'

You have ZERO comprehension of business, what creates and what destroys real free markets or ethics.

"In general, it can probably be said that the conservative does not object to coercion or arbitrary power so long as it is used for what he regards as the right purposes. He believes that if government is in the hands of decent men, it ought not to be too much restricted by rigid rules. Since he is essentially opportunist and lacks principles..."
Friedrich August von Hayek-Why I am Not a Conservative

 

[bripat9643]

I'm supporting police that happen to be in a union. Then nypd would be pissed at Mayor de Blasio even if there were no Union.

SO, you support a gang of thugs mauling an unarmed man, and choking him to death?

No. Although sadly, that happens quite often in New York...usually black on black crime....but it is what it is.
But no, I don't support a gang of thugs mauling an unarmed man and choking him to death.

But I do support police officers using control holds to take down a man who is resisting arrest...as was the case in the Garner incident.

You folks have NOTHING that could be mistaken for human traits, Christian morals or human decency. You are authoritarian followers. You are the very same people who could carry out genocide

The people who have actually carried out genocide are all lefties like you.

 

[Bfgrn]

I'm supporting police that happen to be in a union. Then nypd would be pissed at Mayor de Blasio even if there were no Union.

SO, you support a gang of thugs mauling an unarmed man, and choking him to death?

No. Although sadly, that happens quite often in New York...usually black on black crime....but it is what it is.
But no, I don't support a gang of thugs mauling an unarmed man and choking him to death.

But I do support police officers using control holds to take down a man who is resisting arrest...as was the case in the Garner incident.

You folks have NOTHING that could be mistaken for human traits, Christian morals or human decency. You are authoritarian followers. You are the very same people who could carry out genocide

The people who have actually carried out genocide are all lefties like you.

Yea, and al Qaeda is a bunch of liberals too.

 

[Sarah G]

I'm supporting police that happen to be in a union. Then nypd would be pissed at Mayor de Blasio even if there were no Union.

SO, you support a gang of thugs mauling an unarmed man, and choking him to death?

No. Although sadly, that happens quite often in New York...usually black on black crime....but it is what it is.
But no, I don't support a gang of thugs mauling an unarmed man and choking him to death.

But I do support police officers using control holds to take down a man who is resisting arrest...as was the case in the Garner incident.

You folks have NOTHING that could be mistaken for human traits, Christian morals or human decency. You are authoritarian followers. You are the very same people who could carry out genocide

The people who have actually carried out genocide are all lefties like you.

That is NOT true... Omg.

 

[Wildman]

Just so we get this fact clear going forward...

YOU folks on the right are supporting a UNION. And not just any union, a PUBLIC sector union.

However you want to twist it, that is an irrefutable FACT...


"In general, it can probably be said that the conservative does not object to coercion or arbitrary power so long as it is used for what he regards as the right purposes. He believes that if government is in the hands of decent men, it ought not to be too much restricted by rigid rules. Since he is essentially opportunist and lacks principles..."
Friedrich August von Hayek-Why I am Not a Conservative

Straw man argument. Dumb. The right is supporting police officers. Democrats do not support labor unions. Clinton signed NAFTA. Gore went on TV to debate Perot in support of it.

I love how you slack jawed cletus's in flyover county act like you know anything about the politics of NYC, The Police happen to in contract negotiations with the city and have fought against civilian over site, which plays into the political theater.

////////////////////
talk about slack jawed cletus's, where is this site that civilians are supposed be over ? and how does one get to be over it, ballon, helicopter or drone ?? personally i think you are an idiot who is trying his damned best to appear somewhat smart, re-read your note and find the discrepancies i found.

AND .....................