Tab Content
  • fcreature's Avatar
    Today, 09:51 AM
    At what point does the executive just stop paying attention to the dictates of the courts? This is the approach that needs to be taken.
    3 replies | 104 view(s)
  • fcreature's Avatar
    Today, 09:34 AM
    "Shilling"? Not sure there is any shilling going on in this thread, exactly. When the government becomes this large and offers a welfare state to it's citizens, you can't expect companies operating in a rational manner to not take advantage of those policies. This is the environment they operate in and the truth is if they don't do it, their competitors will and they will go out of business. Sure, it's immoral. But the immorality of stealing money from your citizens to fund a welfare state and to redistribute wealth is an immorality of much greater significance. It is what allows and outright encourages companies like Amazon to do what they do. I'm as suspicious of Amazon as any. They're doing their best to monopolize my industry. Amazon is not alone in it's abuse of our nanny state. And the problem extends far beyond the pay that is offered to employees.
    163 replies | 1632 view(s)
  • fcreature's Avatar
    Today, 09:17 AM
    I don't really think who someone voted for in the general says so much about a persons ideology. When you only have 2 feasible choices with Hillary being one, I won't blame you. But if you supported someone like Trump over Rand in the primary stage prior to Rand dropping out with a pathetic excuse like "OMG Rand back-stabbed Ron and endorsed Romney in 2012!!!!", I would seriously question any claim to be libertarian. So my point isn't that people who voted for Trump aren't libertarians. My point is that this supposed "base" consisting of libertarian thinkers that Ron has built that could be transferred to any other liberty candidate was nothing but a fairy tail we told ourselves. I thought it too. Hell, the movement really did appear to be real in 2008. But it wasn't. It was just a random coalition of different groups that had random grievances with the government that they wanted to air. It had nothing to do with ideological consistency. Percentage wise, there are just as many clueless Ron Paul voters in 2008 and 2012 as there were Obama and Hillary voters. This is the harsh reality that Rand's campaign figured out during GOTV efforts going into the Iowa caucus.
    109 replies | 1625 view(s)
  • fcreature's Avatar
    Today, 07:06 AM
    Yup. Anyone operating on the premise that there is any sort of libertarian / Ron Paul base that can take someone to the Presidency is out of their mind. Ron's wack-job coalition has dispersed. It's time to get over it.
    109 replies | 1625 view(s)
  • fcreature's Avatar
    Today, 07:01 AM
    Just your opinion. One I absolutely disagree with. Rand ran against a very strong group of candidates, fighting with 16 others for airtime. Arguably it was the strongest group of candidates in a lifetime. Ron ran against what, 7? 5 or 6 of which were trash candidates. Ron had very little competition in 2008. Then you have the Trump factor which nobody saw coming. Rand ran a campaign that most likely would have done very well in any other election year. With that being said, obviously there were mistakes made. But your characterization of his campaign is simply wrong. Here is why: You are still operating on the premise that Ron actually had a significant base of support of ideologically principled libertarians that would transfer to Rand.
    109 replies | 1625 view(s)
  • fcreature's Avatar
    Yesterday, 08:53 AM
    His base will hate him no matter what he does. That's a losing battle. Just look at RPF. Rand can't make a political move without pissing off half the "libertarians" who supported his father. It's pathetic really. This "movement" does it's absolute best to tear itself apart at every possible opportunity. Rand is, by leaps and bounds, the best Senator we've had in a generation. And you'll still get people here bitching and moaning that he endorsed Romney. Boo-fucking-hoo. I was the biggest Ron Paul supporter in the world, but he had lost and stepped aside and Rand made an endorsement. So what? The more political capital Rand has, the better it will be for our positions in the long run. And frankly, he doesn't need the support of a few thousand libertarians whom you can't depend on at any moment anyway. A huge portion of Trump's base loves Rand, and that isn't a bad thing.
    109 replies | 1625 view(s)
  • fcreature's Avatar
    04-09-2018, 09:24 AM
    Really not worth anyone's time to respond to something as idiotic as the idea that taxing something helps to lower it's price.
    109 replies | 2108 view(s)
  • fcreature's Avatar
    03-28-2018, 07:19 PM
    Usually there is at least some sort of backward mental gymnastics I can at least understand for how they get to their conclusions. This time though, I don't know. There is no way what-so-ever to con yourself into thinking this is the wall that was promised. It is explicitly a repaired fence that already exists.
    153 replies | 2069 view(s)
  • fcreature's Avatar
    03-28-2018, 06:12 PM
    Getting a kick out of the Trumpkins over at TD convincing themselves that this 30 mile fence replacement is the border wall Trump promised. LOL
    153 replies | 2069 view(s)
  • fcreature's Avatar
    03-27-2018, 06:19 PM
    100% of gun murderers also eat food. Guess Influenza thinks we need to ban food too?
    94 replies | 1732 view(s)
  • fcreature's Avatar
    03-27-2018, 05:00 PM
    That has absolutely nothing to do with what I said. Try again.
    94 replies | 1732 view(s)
  • fcreature's Avatar
    03-27-2018, 04:12 PM
    lol There is no correlation between gun ownership and gun murder rates. This is a mathematical and statistical fact. If you know how to do math, you can figure it out for yourself.
    94 replies | 1732 view(s)
  • fcreature's Avatar
    03-27-2018, 02:57 PM
    Exactly. I've had multiple teachers tell me that you can't trust their peers to be armed. Their reasons vary but have included: - Students could attack the teacher and take their gun (wouldn't it be easier for a student to just bring in a gun instead?) - Gun could accidentally go off (no... not really) - When angry with a student, teachers may decide to brandish or even use their weapon (wow!!!) In fact, I've gotten into this argument with several teachers. I simply have no words to say when a teacher tells me that if a teacher is angry, they'll use the gun on their students. If this is true why the hell are we sending our students to these schools? How can we trust these adults with anything, much less the teaching of our children?
    10 replies | 293 view(s)
  • fcreature's Avatar
    03-27-2018, 06:45 AM
    My thought as well... I was in a school shooting freshmen year of high school. No way my parents would have let me ride my bike back to school after getting home. It would have been impossible anyway. We were locked up for hours until the police secured the scene then we were bussed to another school where everyone's parents were directed to pick us up. By time we got home it was pretty late and no way were the police letting anyone on the high school campus...
    94 replies | 1732 view(s)
  • fcreature's Avatar
    03-26-2018, 09:09 PM
    update:
    94 replies | 1732 view(s)
No More Results
About fcreature

Basic Information

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
920
Posts Per Day
0.25
General Information
Last Activity
Today 05:25 PM
Join Date
01-30-2008
Referrals
0

1 Friend

  1. almyz125 almyz125 is offline

    Member

    almyz125
Showing Friends 1 to 1 of 1

04-06-2018


05-05-2016


Page 2 of 21 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast

03-13-2018


03-12-2018



Page 2 of 21 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast