What liberals dont understand.....

[danielpalos]

emilynghiem danielpalos lives for japanese massage parlors and leftist shilling and wants the girls to do it for free. It doesn't work like that. They deserve to make their money.

Dear Marion Morrison

If danielpalos and other liberals/progressives
don't want Christian values (like Right to Life mandates)
imposed on the public through Federal Govt
we need to unite and agree not to impose
Socialist values (like Right to heath care mandates)
imposed nationally either.

This isn't either/or Marion Morrison
It's a matter of teaching all people and parties
what it really means to enforce
EQUAL JUSTICE and PROTECTION OF THE LAWS
for ALL PEOPLE REGARDLESS OF CREED.

We need to learn this.
Otherwise, we suffer until political abuses where
parties EXPLOIT voters and govt to play games
imposing one parties' beliefs in fear of the other.

Taxpayers lose this game played at our expense.
We need to unite, demand restitution be REIMBURSED
to Taxpayers for Govt abuses, and re-invest the taxes
we are owed (previously misspent unconstitutionally)
and use those to finance solutions we really want!

prevention is better than abortion.

 

[danielpalos]

And conservatives don’t understand the definition of “socialism “ .

Giving illegals free healthcare.

Let’s pay this out . You don’t rather illegals not have access to healthcare? You’d have people just die at the hospital door?

Might as well offer insurance plans to everyone who can’t get them at work . Who cares about their immigration status .

You would have us pay for the health care for every poverty stricken person on the damn planet.

promote the general welfare not the general warfare and abolish our useless wars on crime, drugs, and terror.

Dear danielpalos
IN ADDITION to Promoting General Welfare,
the Govt must also respect CIVIL LIBERTIES of individuals
and not deprive citizens of liberty, property or INCOME without DUE PROCESS OF LAWS.

In cases of CIVIL or CRIMINAL PENALTIES - if a PERSON has violated laws
and owes restitution YES the GOVT/LAWS can require and force payment.

However danielpalos if citizens have NOT committed any crime, abuse or violation,
there must be Democratic process to ensure CONSENT of TAXPAYERS
to prevent tyrannical abuse of Govt.

That's part of Constitutional laws the Govt is ALSO required to follow.
Not just promoting general welfare without any checks or balances.
There has to be
* compelling interest proven (ie which citizens CONSENT to, not Govt imposed)
* LEAST RESTRICTIVE MEANS

HSLDA | THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT PRECEDENT DESCRIBING THE COMPELLING INTEREST TEST: THE “LEAST RESTRICTIVE MEANS” COMPONENT; THE COMPELLING INTEREST MUST BE “ESSENTIAL” AND “NECESSARY

THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT PRECEDENT DESCRIBING THE COMPELLING INTEREST TEST: THE “LEAST RESTRICTIVE MEANS” COMPONENT



“Requiring a State to demonstrate a compelling interest and show that it has adopted the least restrictive means of achieving that interest is the most demanding test known to constitutional law.”
City of Boerne v. Flores, 1997 US Lexis 4035, 46

“When the State enacts legislation that intentionally or unintentionally places a burden upon religiously motivated practice, it must justify that burden by showing that it is the least restrictive means of achieving some compelling state interest.’”
Church of Lukumi Babalu Aye v. Hialeah, 508 U.S. 520, 578, (1993)

“Court recognized the State’s interest in restricting the ballot to parties with demonstrated public support, the Court took the requirement for statewide contests as an indication that the more onerous standard for local contests was not the least restrictive means of advancing that interest.”
Norman v. Reed, 502 U.S. 279, 292, (1992)

“[T]he Court of Appeals concluded that it was unclear whether Resolution 66-156 directly advanced the State’s asserted interests and whether, if it did, it was the least restrictive means to that end.”
Board of Trustees of the State Univ. of New York v. Fox, 492 U.S. 469, 473, (1989)

“The Government may, however, regulate the content of constitutionally protected speech in order to promote a compelling interest if it chooses the least restrictive means to further the articulated interest.”
Sable Communis. of California, Inc. v. FCC, 492 U.S. 115, 126, (1989)

“[H]e contends that the State must establish that the disclosure requirement directly advances the relevant governmental interest and that it constitutes the least restrictive means of doing so.”
Zauderer v. Office of Disciplinary Counsel of the Supreme Court of Ohio
471 U.S. 626, 650, (1985)

“The state may justify an inroad on religious liberty by showing that it is the least restrictive means of achieving some compelling state interest.”
Thomas v. Review Bd. of the Indiana Empl. Sec. Div., 450 U.S. 707, 718, (1981)

THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT:
THE COMPELLING INTEREST MUST BE “ESSENTIAL” AND “NECESSARY”

“The state may justify a limitation on religious liberty by showing that it is essential to accomplish a overriding government interest.”
United States v. Lee, 455 US 252, 257, (1982)

“The Court of Appeals found the injunction to be content based and neither necessary to serve a compelling interest nor narrowly drawn to achieve that end.”
Madsen v. Women’s Health Center, 512 US __, __, (1994)

“[W]e think it clear that a government regulation is sufficiently justified . . . if the incidental restriction on the alleged First Amendment freedom is no greater than is essential to that [governmental] interest.”
Barnes v. Glen Theatre Inc., 501 US 560, 567, (1991)

“For the state to enforce a content-based exclusion it must show that its regulation is necessary to serve a compelling state interest and that it is narrowly drawn to achieve that end.”
Perry Ed. Assn. v. Perry Local Ed. Assn., 460 US 37, 45, (1983)

“It [the university] must show that its regulation is necessary to serve a compelling state interest and that it is narrowly drawn to achieve that end.”
Widmar v. Vincent, 454 US 263, 270, (1981)

“[The] appellees were exercising a constitutional right, and any classification which serves to penalize the exercise of that right, unless shown to be necessary to promote a compelling government interest, is unconstitutional.”
Shapiro v. Thompson, 394 US 618, 634, (1969)

“[W]e think it clear that a government regulation is sufficiently justified . . . if the incidental restriction on the alleged First Amendment freedom is no greater than is essential to that [governmental] interest.”
United States v. O’Brien, 391 US 367, 377, (1968)

equal protection of the law for unemployment compensation can solve most of our problems.

 

[emilynghiem]

Giving illegals free healthcare.

Let’s pay this out . You don’t rather illegals not have access to healthcare? You’d have people just die at the hospital door?

Might as well offer insurance plans to everyone who can’t get them at work . Who cares about their immigration status .

You would have us pay for the health care for every poverty stricken person on the damn planet.

promote the general welfare not the general warfare and abolish our useless wars on crime, drugs, and terror.

Dear danielpalos
IN ADDITION to Promoting General Welfare,
the Govt must also respect CIVIL LIBERTIES of individuals
and not deprive citizens of liberty, property or INCOME without DUE PROCESS OF LAWS.

In cases of CIVIL or CRIMINAL PENALTIES - if a PERSON has violated laws
and owes restitution YES the GOVT/LAWS can require and force payment.

However danielpalos if citizens have NOT committed any crime, abuse or violation,
there must be Democratic process to ensure CONSENT of TAXPAYERS
to prevent tyrannical abuse of Govt.

That's part of Constitutional laws the Govt is ALSO required to follow.
Not just promoting general welfare without any checks or balances.
There has to be
* compelling interest proven (ie which citizens CONSENT to, not Govt imposed)
* LEAST RESTRICTIVE MEANS

HSLDA | THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT PRECEDENT DESCRIBING THE COMPELLING INTEREST TEST: THE “LEAST RESTRICTIVE MEANS” COMPONENT; THE COMPELLING INTEREST MUST BE “ESSENTIAL” AND “NECESSARY

THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT PRECEDENT DESCRIBING THE COMPELLING INTEREST TEST: THE “LEAST RESTRICTIVE MEANS” COMPONENT



“Requiring a State to demonstrate a compelling interest and show that it has adopted the least restrictive means of achieving that interest is the most demanding test known to constitutional law.”
City of Boerne v. Flores, 1997 US Lexis 4035, 46

“When the State enacts legislation that intentionally or unintentionally places a burden upon religiously motivated practice, it must justify that burden by showing that it is the least restrictive means of achieving some compelling state interest.’”
Church of Lukumi Babalu Aye v. Hialeah, 508 U.S. 520, 578, (1993)

“Court recognized the State’s interest in restricting the ballot to parties with demonstrated public support, the Court took the requirement for statewide contests as an indication that the more onerous standard for local contests was not the least restrictive means of advancing that interest.”
Norman v. Reed, 502 U.S. 279, 292, (1992)

“[T]he Court of Appeals concluded that it was unclear whether Resolution 66-156 directly advanced the State’s asserted interests and whether, if it did, it was the least restrictive means to that end.”
Board of Trustees of the State Univ. of New York v. Fox, 492 U.S. 469, 473, (1989)

“The Government may, however, regulate the content of constitutionally protected speech in order to promote a compelling interest if it chooses the least restrictive means to further the articulated interest.”
Sable Communis. of California, Inc. v. FCC, 492 U.S. 115, 126, (1989)

“[H]e contends that the State must establish that the disclosure requirement directly advances the relevant governmental interest and that it constitutes the least restrictive means of doing so.”
Zauderer v. Office of Disciplinary Counsel of the Supreme Court of Ohio
471 U.S. 626, 650, (1985)

“The state may justify an inroad on religious liberty by showing that it is the least restrictive means of achieving some compelling state interest.”
Thomas v. Review Bd. of the Indiana Empl. Sec. Div., 450 U.S. 707, 718, (1981)

THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT:
THE COMPELLING INTEREST MUST BE “ESSENTIAL” AND “NECESSARY”

“The state may justify a limitation on religious liberty by showing that it is essential to accomplish a overriding government interest.”
United States v. Lee, 455 US 252, 257, (1982)

“The Court of Appeals found the injunction to be content based and neither necessary to serve a compelling interest nor narrowly drawn to achieve that end.”
Madsen v. Women’s Health Center, 512 US __, __, (1994)

“[W]e think it clear that a government regulation is sufficiently justified . . . if the incidental restriction on the alleged First Amendment freedom is no greater than is essential to that [governmental] interest.”
Barnes v. Glen Theatre Inc., 501 US 560, 567, (1991)

“For the state to enforce a content-based exclusion it must show that its regulation is necessary to serve a compelling state interest and that it is narrowly drawn to achieve that end.”
Perry Ed. Assn. v. Perry Local Ed. Assn., 460 US 37, 45, (1983)

“It [the university] must show that its regulation is necessary to serve a compelling state interest and that it is narrowly drawn to achieve that end.”
Widmar v. Vincent, 454 US 263, 270, (1981)

“[The] appellees were exercising a constitutional right, and any classification which serves to penalize the exercise of that right, unless shown to be necessary to promote a compelling government interest, is unconstitutional.”
Shapiro v. Thompson, 394 US 618, 634, (1969)

“[W]e think it clear that a government regulation is sufficiently justified . . . if the incidental restriction on the alleged First Amendment freedom is no greater than is essential to that [governmental] interest.”
United States v. O’Brien, 391 US 367, 377, (1968)

equal protection of the law for unemployment compensation can solve most of our problems.

Yes and no danielpalos
If it's done through the State that's different from Federal govt
that is harder to reach terms of agreement on.

As for economic improvements
* Bernie Sanders and his supporters advocate for
WORKER OWNED COOPERATIVES
* Nonprofit Health Care Cooperatives will also
cut costs of health care, reduce dependence on larger groups or on govt
to just the minimum that actually works cost effectively, while shifting
more of the JOBS, training and management to LOCALLY OWNED
programs where people would MAXIMIZE control of choices.

So there are BETTER OPTIONS than just depending on federal govt
which is best reserved for just the policies that are so uniform and
neutral across the board the whole nation can agree. All the rest
concerning HEALTH CARE, education and related economics
are best managed on local levels to ensure democratic participation and representation.
It COSTS LESS and WORKS BETTER than trying to govern
diverse populations and needs of 50 states all through Congress and centralized govt.

The more we work out solutions democratically, cost effectively
and sustainably on local levels, then just the UNIVERSALLY agreed policies
and programs can be reserved for federal govt that shouldn't involve individualized choices
better suited to local and state.

 

[Wyatt earp]

emilynghiem danielpalos lives for japanese massage parlors and leftist shilling and wants the girls to do it for free. It doesn't work like that. They deserve to make their money.

Dear Marion Morrison

If danielpalos and other liberals/progressives
don't want Christian values (like Right to Life mandates)
imposed on the public through Federal Govt
we need to unite and agree not to impose
Socialist values (like Right to heath care mandates)
imposed nationally either.

This isn't either/or Marion Morrison
It's a matter of teaching all people and parties
what it really means to enforce
EQUAL JUSTICE and PROTECTION OF THE LAWS
for ALL PEOPLE REGARDLESS OF CREED.

We need to learn this.
Otherwise, we suffer until political abuses where
parties EXPLOIT voters and govt to play games
imposing one parties' beliefs in fear of the other.

Taxpayers lose this game played at our expense.
We need to unite, demand restitution be REIMBURSED
to Taxpayers for Govt abuses, and re-invest the taxes
we are owed (previously misspent unconstitutionally)
and use those to finance solutions we really want!

prevention is better than abortion.

You said that?

.

 

[Marion Morrison]

emilynghiem danielpalos lives for japanese massage parlors and leftist shilling and wants the girls to do it for free. It doesn't work like that. They deserve to make their money.

i believe in the socialism of equality and equal protection of the law so women can also simply apply for unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed under capitalism.

then, women can do "do it for free".

Not going to happen, numbnuts.

Women are people too. You are the ultimate misogynist of all time and everything.

 

[emilynghiem]

As a staunch conservative I will not accept liberal/socialist rule.
I will fight it with violence if need be.

And conservatives don’t understand the definition of “socialism “ .

Dear Timmy
I would agree that people aren't using the term to mean the same things.
Could you please reply to the previous msgs I posted
on the difference between LOCAL, State and FEDERAL GOVT levels.

If we distinguish between these levels,
that will help sort out the difference.

Calling it "socialism" just cause confusion and fights.
Why don't we specify what levels of govt we are talking
about using for which functions using which process?

Thanks Timmy
CowboyTed and danielpalos as well

 

[Marion Morrison]

As a staunch conservative I will not accept liberal/socialist rule.
I will fight it with violence if need be.

And conservatives don’t understand the definition of “socialism “ .

Dear Timmy
I would agree that people aren't using the term to mean the same things.
Could you please reply to the previous msgs I posted
on the difference between LOCAL, State and FEDERAL GOVT levels.

If we distinguish between these levels,
that will help sort out the difference.

Calling it "socialism" just cause confusion and fights.
Why don't we specify what levels of govt we are talking
about using for which functions using which process?

Thanks Timmy
CowboyTed and danielpalos as well

This cracker says "ok" because he likes her. Indeed he does, and there's no changing that.

 

[emilynghiem]

emilynghiem danielpalos lives for japanese massage parlors and leftist shilling and wants the girls to do it for free. It doesn't work like that. They deserve to make their money.

i believe in the socialism of equality and equal protection of the law so women can also simply apply for unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed under capitalism.

then, women can do "do it for free".

Thanks for clarifying danielpalos
WHICH women do you mean?

Can't these women choose if they want to work under which systems?

I knew women activists AGAINST the welfare system because it
penalized people for working their way up, trying to own cars
and get an education. It had adverse effects opposite from what was intended.

Also why can't Taxpayers choose which terms and programs to support?

There are programs based on
* Microlending and business training.
* Cooperative health care that creates paid jobs with money saved by not paying high profits to insurance
* medical education covered by public service internships

Would you support a system similar to
Military service where education and benefits are provided,
but based on MEDICAL education, training and public service?

Why not give taxpayers a CHOICE what programs work best
and deduct that from our taxes so we don't dictate
"one policy for all" through "federal govt."

 

[Marion Morrison]

emilynghiem danielpalos lives for japanese massage parlors and leftist shilling and wants the girls to do it for free. It doesn't work like that. They deserve to make their money.

i believe in the socialism of equality and equal protection of the law so women can also simply apply for unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed under capitalism.

then, women can do "do it for free".

Thanks for clarifying danielpalos
WHICH women do you mean?

Can't these women choose if they want to work under which systems?

I knew women activists AGAINST the welfare system because it
penalized people for working their way up, trying to own cars
and get an education. It had adverse effects opposite from what was intended.

Also why can't Taxpayers choose which terms and programs to support?

There are programs based on
* Microlending and business training.
* Cooperative health care that creates paid jobs with money saved by not paying high profits to insurance
* medical education covered by public service internships

Would you support a system similar to
Military service where education and benefits are provided,
but based on MEDICAL education, training and public service?

Why not give taxpayers a CHOICE what programs work best
and deduct that from our taxes so we don't dictate
"one policy for all" through "federal govt."

emilynghiem
He wants someone to jerk his gherkin for free. That is the extent of danielpalos.
You're probably married, he don't care, he's a piece of shit like that

 

[emilynghiem]

emilynghiem danielpalos lives for japanese massage parlors and leftist shilling and wants the girls to do it for free. It doesn't work like that. They deserve to make their money.

i believe in the socialism of equality and equal protection of the law so women can also simply apply for unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed under capitalism.

then, women can do "do it for free".

Thanks for clarifying danielpalos
WHICH women do you mean?

Can't these women choose if they want to work under which systems?

I knew women activists AGAINST the welfare system because it
penalized people for working their way up, trying to own cars
and get an education. It had adverse effects opposite from what was intended.

Also why can't Taxpayers choose which terms and programs to support?

There are programs based on
* Microlending and business training.
* Cooperative health care that creates paid jobs with money saved by not paying high profits to insurance
* medical education covered by public service internships

Would you support a system similar to
Military service where education and benefits are provided,
but based on MEDICAL education, training and public service?

Why not give taxpayers a CHOICE what programs work best
and deduct that from our taxes so we don't dictate
"one policy for all" through "federal govt."

emilynghiem
He wants someone to jerk his gherkin for free. That is the extent of danielpalos.
You're probably married, he don't care, he's a piece of shit like that

Marion Morrison
My other can be quite the opposite direction than I focus on,
yet we agree on the underlying principles and work ethics.

The right person for danielpalos will likely
enhance and complement much the same way,
bringing out the best side of him (and worst parts
to be corrected at the same time).

If I can help pick apart some of those areas that need tweaking,
the more danielpalos works to resolve his own issues himself,
then the right people will come along to help with the rest.

This WHOLE PROCESS of working out issues will improve both
* local, individual personal relations
* collective, institutional and society relationships

Whatever purpose and goals you commit to in life,
you will attract the same energy - either positive or negative.

I'd rather people work in a positive direction and attract positive
people to work toward making the most of their
talents and relationships, rather than stay stuck in negative ruts.

Best Wishes as always to you, too, Marion Morrison
May we ALL become better and better people
for having exchanged perspectives in order to grow from
the contributions shared with each other here and applied elsewhere.

 

[Marion Morrison]

emilynghiem danielpalos lives for japanese massage parlors and leftist shilling and wants the girls to do it for free. It doesn't work like that. They deserve to make their money.

i believe in the socialism of equality and equal protection of the law so women can also simply apply for unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed under capitalism.

then, women can do "do it for free".

Thanks for clarifying danielpalos
WHICH women do you mean?

Can't these women choose if they want to work under which systems?

I knew women activists AGAINST the welfare system because it
penalized people for working their way up, trying to own cars
and get an education. It had adverse effects opposite from what was intended.

Also why can't Taxpayers choose which terms and programs to support?

There are programs based on
* Microlending and business training.
* Cooperative health care that creates paid jobs with money saved by not paying high profits to insurance
* medical education covered by public service internships

Would you support a system similar to
Military service where education and benefits are provided,
but based on MEDICAL education, training and public service?

Why not give taxpayers a CHOICE what programs work best
and deduct that from our taxes so we don't dictate
"one policy for all" through "federal govt."

emilynghiem
He wants someone to jerk his gherkin for free. That is the extent of danielpalos.
You're probably married, he don't care, he's a piece of shit like that

Marion Morrison
My other can be quite the opposite direction than I focus on,
yet we agree on the underlying principles and work ethics.

The right person for danielpalos will likely
enhance and complement much the same way,
bringing out the best side of him (and worst parts
to be corrected at the same time).

If I can help pick apart some of those areas that need tweaking,
the more danielpalos works to resolve his own issues himself,
then the right people will come along to help with the rest.

This WHOLE PROCESS of working out issues will improve both
* local, individual personal relations
* collective, institutional and society relationships

Whatever purpose and goals you commit to in life,
you will attract the same energy - either positive or negative.

I'd rather people work in a positive direction and attract positive
people to work toward making the most of their
talents and relationships, rather than stay stuck in negative ruts.

Best Wishes as always to you, too, Marion Morrison
May we ALL become better and better people
for having exchanged perspectives in order to grow from
the contributions shared with each other here and applied elsewhere.

I am who I am. I am a 9th generation American and a 7th generation Floridian. That's me.

Yeah, Adam Putnam is less cracker that I am
When they talk about cracker? That's me, baby.

I am the cracker they talk about.
My white and black friends call me cracker.

Know why? Because I am that cracker. I am ashamed of nothing and proud of my heritage. My people built America

 

[emilynghiem]

you don't believe in natural rights?

The natural right to be a parasite?

don't even understand the concepts, do you.

Money is all he respects in life like many people who are addicted to articles of a shinny nature

Yep, that sure explains the lefts position on healthcare for all, free college, reparations, income equality and all the other BS you folks come up with.

or, we could solve simple poverty and let markets "float within those goalposts".

Dear danielpalos
I believe people should be able to work out agreements
WHICH terms and policies to pay for on state or federal levels,
and which to leave to private choice to fund or not fund.

If YOU want to pay for unemployment for certain people with or without restrictions,
why not let YOU fund the programs and policies YOU believe in supporting.

Let others do the same, and choose for themselves, which are the most effective, productive and sustainable.

And then where we all agree to implement certain programs on a collective level,
let THOSE programs get endorsed or established through state or federal govt.

But where we disagree, we could still respect each other's freedom of beliefs
to invest in the programs of our own choosing. Why do we have to fight about this at all?

 

[emilynghiem]

emilynghiem danielpalos lives for japanese massage parlors and leftist shilling and wants the girls to do it for free. It doesn't work like that. They deserve to make their money.

i believe in the socialism of equality and equal protection of the law so women can also simply apply for unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed under capitalism.

then, women can do "do it for free".

Thanks for clarifying danielpalos
WHICH women do you mean?

Can't these women choose if they want to work under which systems?

I knew women activists AGAINST the welfare system because it
penalized people for working their way up, trying to own cars
and get an education. It had adverse effects opposite from what was intended.

Also why can't Taxpayers choose which terms and programs to support?

There are programs based on
* Microlending and business training.
* Cooperative health care that creates paid jobs with money saved by not paying high profits to insurance
* medical education covered by public service internships

Would you support a system similar to
Military service where education and benefits are provided,
but based on MEDICAL education, training and public service?

Why not give taxpayers a CHOICE what programs work best
and deduct that from our taxes so we don't dictate
"one policy for all" through "federal govt."

emilynghiem
He wants someone to jerk his gherkin for free. That is the extent of danielpalos.
You're probably married, he don't care, he's a piece of shit like that

Marion Morrison
My other can be quite the opposite direction than I focus on,
yet we agree on the underlying principles and work ethics.

The right person for danielpalos will likely
enhance and complement much the same way,
bringing out the best side of him (and worst parts
to be corrected at the same time).

If I can help pick apart some of those areas that need tweaking,
the more danielpalos works to resolve his own issues himself,
then the right people will come along to help with the rest.

This WHOLE PROCESS of working out issues will improve both
* local, individual personal relations
* collective, institutional and society relationships

Whatever purpose and goals you commit to in life,
you will attract the same energy - either positive or negative.

I'd rather people work in a positive direction and attract positive
people to work toward making the most of their
talents and relationships, rather than stay stuck in negative ruts.

Best Wishes as always to you, too, Marion Morrison
May we ALL become better and better people
for having exchanged perspectives in order to grow from
the contributions shared with each other here and applied elsewhere.

I am who I am. I am a 9th generation American and a 7th generation Floridian. That's me.

Yeah, Adam Putnam is less cracker that I am
When they talk about cracker? That's me, baby.

I am the cracker they talk about.
My white and black friends call me cracker.

Know why? Because I am that cracker. I am ashamed of nothing and proud of my heritage. My people built America

Yee-haw Marion Morrison
I'm a Native Texan myself, born to Vietnamese immigrant parents
who taught me the value of hard work ethics, doing things yourself,
and helping others who don't have the same advantages I have had.

I believe in sustainable cost-effective development.
And that OWNERSHIP means taking responsibility for costs and consequences.

If it's too bureaucratic and gets out of local control,
then we lose ability to represent the people paying for programs.
It has to maintain accountability by being democratically structured and checked against abuses.

I don't see how we're going to get there
without MASS civics education, training in Constitutional ethics
and law enforcement, and how to resolve conflicts
and REDRESS GRIEVANCES so we hold wrongdoers accountable
for corruption, abuse, and waste and recover from debts and damages already done.

Instead of Conservatives yelling about the problems with liberals,
Millenials and anyone else thinking more Govt controls and taxes
are going to magically solve social and economic problems,
I'd like to set up MENTORSHIPS and INTERNSHIPS where both
Conservative and Liberal leaders can get paid to work out solutions,
based on business plans that investors/donors AGREE TO FUND.

Why can't we partner up and solve problems together?
Challenge the liberals who think they have solutions
to propose solid business plans, and solicit business leaders
to invest and mentor them in creating real life solutions.

PROVE they work first, if you are going to pitch those as govt policies.
Why waste billions of dollars on campaigns for leaders all running
for the same offices? Why not create jobs for ALL leaders willing
to develop and implement solutions? And make funding these
plans TAX DEDUCTIBLE in order to shift control of social programs
from federal govt back to people and states to manage locally ourselves?

 

[JimBowie1958]

What liberals dont understand.....


Reality.

 

[JimBowie1958]

As a staunch conservative I will not accept liberal/socialist rule.
I will fight it with violence if need be.

1. You cant just start a Civil War because you keep losing elections to liberals. You wont bring enough people from regular society to your point of view to win the thing; you'll just be hunted down like a common criminal.

2. Fight for the hearts and minds of the main stream society in order to win such a conflict. You need to win people in the government to your point of view, the military, the police, the support staff in the government, etc. To do this you have to wait until you have an incident that most agree justify rebellion. This would be something that violates the Bill of Rights, like gun confiscation or government censorship.

3. If you do rebel, have a legal organization that has absolutely no ties to your violent rebelling wing. They can work in concert with each other without being privy to each others plans. The legal wing argues to win sympathizers, while the violent wing targets the most aggressive members of the government that are pushing the agenda that started the war.

4. Be patient. Let things stew to the point that action is necessary. It is best to wait as long as you can possibly wait without engaging in conflict. This means you have more people working in concert with you when it begins and enhances your chances of success.

5. Stop telling people what you plan to do on the internet.

As far as I am concerned, very little justifies Civil War that is n ot the most egregious form of government tyranny. Too many people die in such wars, and not just the enemy.

Your friends, your family, your most loved ones will also suffer and many will die as well.

Look at your grandfather, son, aunts and uncles, close friends and ask yourself, 'Would I trade their life in order to fight this horrible thing?'

If not, then chillax and watch a funny TV show.

 

[CowboyTed]

Using my money for that free stuff.

That's the funny thing about taxes, once they collect it governments don't think it's your money anymore...

And trying to fight it is pretty useless

Funny thing about taxes, if you withhold payment, the government doesn't have your money. A general tax strike is VERY effective in getting the attention of the ruling elite,

So you want to disband the Military, Police, Fire Dept and Border Security....

 

[CowboyTed]

As a staunch conservative I will not accept liberal/socialist rule.
I will fight it with violence if need be.

Dear HereWeGoAgain
What liberals don't understand is their socialist beliefs
count as a political religion, and is therefore UNCONSTITUTIONAL
to establish through govt unless taxpayers consent.

What CONSERVATIVES don't understand is we need to
ESTABLISH that socialism is a political religion and
ENFORCE Constitutional laws against that
WITHOUT threatening violence, oppressing or censorship.

It's one thing to try to DENY liberals the right to practice their
own socialism beliefs by voluntary participation and funding.

It's a DIFFERENT approach to use the Constitution to enforce
rules against establishing beliefs through govt and discriminate by creed.

That's what Conservatives don't get and aren't doing either.
Just freaking out and wanting to get rid of liberals,
instead of enforcing laws that would already preclude
socialist beliefs from being established unconstitutionally.

Let us explain things to you. The Military, Roads, Police, Fire Dept,.... are all socialist programs..

The government have virtual monopoly of these services and taxpayers pay for them...

So I think you have to define what you think socialism is?

No, you ignorant lying fuck, none of those things are socialism.

What are "the means of production," stupid?

It is socialism as public provision of goods and services - in this case, protective services provided by government entities and paid for by taxes. You could arrange a society where these are provided by private organizations, and in fact we do have for-hire private security services. But most people across the political spectrum don’t object to military, fire protection, and police being provided by the government. (A lot of people bitch about paying taxes to pay for it, though.)

So generally here is how you know socialism:
You pay taxes and government uses it provide service or product...

 

[Mac1958]

What are you guys gonna do, just walk into crowded places and start shooting people?

Blow up state capitol buildings and media outlets and IRS offices? Boom!

If you can't beat them with intelligence and ideas and at the ballot box, that's it.

You'd better look to your thought leaders for some better ideas, if they actually have any.
.

Uhm they are allowing illegals to vote in some local school elections now, kind of hard to fight that indoctrination by our youth.


.

So you're giving up?
.

 

[jknowgood]

What are you guys gonna do, just walk into crowded places and start shooting people?

Blow up state capitol buildings and media outlets and IRS offices? Boom!

If you can't beat them with intelligence and ideas and at the ballot box, that's it.

You'd better look to your thought leaders for some better ideas, if they actually have any.
.

Lol, liberals want to do away with the electoral college and are wanting illegals to vote. Yes if that happens. There will be violence.

 

[Mac1958]

What are you guys gonna do, just walk into crowded places and start shooting people?

Blow up state capitol buildings and media outlets and IRS offices? Boom!

If you can't beat them with intelligence and ideas and at the ballot box, that's it.

You'd better look to your thought leaders for some better ideas, if they actually have any.
.

Lol, liberals want to do away with the electoral college and are wanting illegals to vote. Yes if that happens. There will be violence.

I agree there could be sporadic violence by domestic terrorists. And they'll have to be dealt with.

But civil war? That's a fantasy of the alternate universe, born out of frustration and impotent rage.
.