Tab Content
  • fisharmor's Avatar
    Today, 07:57 AM
    I think I've mentioned before that there's another misdirection going on here, too. And I hope to show that the damage has *not* already been done. Hispanic migrants have been coming to the US literally forever. It's the core of what the 1943 zoot suit riots were about in LA. I don't see how that's functionally different from today except in scale. Damned migrants are un-American, wearing their large suits when there's a war on and that fabric could have been used in a more patriotic manner. That was 81 years ago. It's been 20 years since I was explaining to the dipshit protowoke boomer girlboss at church that it makes zero sense to emulate megachurches that get 1000 attending one service when there's a Roman Catholic church just down the road that seats 800 had has to have 7 masses every weekend, if attendance is your goal, anyway (we can all see now it wasn't). I'm under no illusions about who it was who made up most of the attendance of those masses back then, and I'm under no illusions about who makes up the attendance now. I also realize what happened over the last 8 years with Hispanics in this country, politically. There are critical masses of them that are actually not OK with their free public school encouraging their daughters to cut their tits off. The ones that I know, and I know several, are at worst slightly right of center on just about every issue now. Most of them are not here to cause damage. They're not here to foment revolution. They realize things were fucked up in their home country and can absolutely be reasoned with and brought to a position where what happened in the home country won't happen here. Provided, of course, that you don't start the conversation by saying "GTFO".
    193 replies | 5598 view(s)
  • fisharmor's Avatar
    Yesterday, 09:58 PM
    I didn't call you an inhuman monster. I asked why we stop at rhetoric that casts them as subhuman, and why we don't follow through. I am further asking why you're falling for the most obvious 5th generation warfare aspect of all of this, and keeping your attention fixated on the proximate problem, the immigrants, instead of focusing attention on the people who are perpetuating the warfare. I'm pretty certain my personal threshold for what to do to them would be at least as low as yours and probably much lower. I certainly would pretend never to have heard of the 8th amendment in that situation. But that's because I see a stark difference between the 5th generation warriors who are hellbent on ruining my standard of living, and the people who are fleeing fucked up political situations created by those same 5g warriors and are just trying to create a future for their children that doesn't involve living in shacks made of billboard.
    193 replies | 5598 view(s)
  • fisharmor's Avatar
    Yesterday, 09:13 PM
    Come on, there's no reason to be extreme here. There's no way you can possibly justify such a super conservative response like that.
    4 replies | 175 view(s)
  • fisharmor's Avatar
    Yesterday, 09:02 PM
    The people "defending our home". Why aren't they out there gunning down the hordes crossing the border? Everyone wanting to "defend the border" (particularly you in the last couple years) has made it very clear they are not fully human. What reason would you give not to simply execute anyone not crossing through a border crossing? Maybe you made some sort of Freudian slip, but I think it's worth exploring. If they don't have the same rights I do, then why isn't mass execution a viable solution?
    193 replies | 5598 view(s)
  • fisharmor's Avatar
    05-27-2024, 08:00 PM
    Your home is just that. Your home. There is no "our" home, comrade. But speaking of which, why don't they just start shooting? There is no logical reason not to.
    193 replies | 5598 view(s)
  • fisharmor's Avatar
    05-27-2024, 07:54 PM
    There are only good faith positions on one side of the abortion debate. Moreover, on the pragmatic side, I would think big-brain political types would be able to see that the overturning of Roe is really the only reason Trump is going to collect the votes to sail back into the office (provided enough vote fraud can be prevented) in direct contravention of literally everything else the man did while in office, as pretty much everything else besides his SCOTUS nominees was in direct opposition of what pro-live voters want. How anyone would think national decriminalization of abortion is in the same solar system as a winning position is quite beyond me.
    33 replies | 3298 view(s)
  • fisharmor's Avatar
    05-27-2024, 07:01 PM
    If there is no natural right to move about, then there is a police state - particularly if free movement is actively curtailed by armed goons. If the privilege of free movement is not God-given and is doled out by the state, then that is at least one natural right you deny.
    193 replies | 5598 view(s)
  • fisharmor's Avatar
    05-16-2024, 06:54 AM
    You and Block are talking about what could be. I'm talking about what *is*. I am arguing that the government is already part of the question. My visceral reaction to abortion does not immediately rise to the level of calm political discussion. It is a despicable act that destroys women's souls. Part of the reason I think that is because I believe surgery is an invasion of the body and any invasion of any kind needs to be weighed very carefully. Women who get elective abortions are not doing this. Neither is Block when he casually talks about surgically removing fetuses. I'm not a woman but I think I've been successfully married long enough to have grown enough mangina to understand this is also how most women think. They don't get past the visceral. And I agree with them in this case. This should be taboo, and it's serious enough that I don't really mind putting on the face paint and carrying the totem. Block isn't talking to what Luther called the "common folk". I'm not looking down on the common folk - I'm just recognizing that they outnumber us and they're either incapable of or uninterested in following these arguments. So the nuanced arguments are not going to get traction. But appealing to the viscera has a chance. Dr Paul himself has said repeatedly that you change the culture and then the laws follow. Block's argument stands a precisely 0.000% chance of doing this. It is therefore a nonsensical waste of time. Anyone who has had surgery should understand this. Particularly surgery with complications. There is no surgery that is risk-free and there never will be. Medicine recently took its mask off when it made us put ours on. Most of what they say is abject bullshit, and any technology involving artificial wombs always going to be particularly susceptible. The time for nuanced argument is over. It's time for middle fingers and fists.
    99 replies | 6533 view(s)
  • fisharmor's Avatar
    05-15-2024, 10:46 AM
    Absolutely. But to be fair: Block was making the evictionism argument during a time when probably a lot of us still had a tiny shred of trust in physicians.
    99 replies | 6533 view(s)
  • fisharmor's Avatar
    05-15-2024, 10:33 AM
    I'm against episiotomies, I'm against planned c-sections, I'm against epidurals - I'm against most of the medical interventions associated with "normal" birth. I'm really against any unnecessary medical intervention of any sort. You could make the argument that issues like severe cleft palate are a necessary fix, and others might make an argument that it's also unnecessary. I would disagree with those people. I think if you're born with a condition or develop a condition through no fault of your own, medicine should step in and give you a better quality of life if it can. I also disagree vehemently with the "autism acceptance" idiots - if medical treatment could do anything to normalize brain function in the most vulnerable of society, it absolutely should. The difference being all of the edge cases I can think of are just that: edge cases. Hard cases make bad law. But leaving aside the fact that abortion is nearly universally elective and therefore doesn't fit with my view of how medicine should generally operate... Leaving aside the fact that women nearly universally voluntarily participated in the action that got them pregnant... If we accept Block's premise that any instance of a woman simply not wanting a pregnancy is a hard case, then that's logically similar to saying "the government should decide who is a good guy who can own guns" or "the government decides who is a citizen and only citizens have constitutional rights". It opens the door for a bunch of dudes in black dresses to wave a magic wand and grant or prohibit en masse the ability to do the thing in question. If Blcok had made the argument that some abortions happen as hard cases, and had addressed the need to keep them hard cases, then I would have been more receptive. But he didn't: he said abortion is horrible and should not happen, and then added a huge BUT and he went with a property rights argument. I understand his argument, but I also think I understand why the likes of (IIRC) Becky Akers went ballistic on him in print - pitching unnecessary surgery as a defense of property rights might make logical sense but it doesn't make practical sense. It's very similar to pitching liposuction as the first and only solution to obesity. Hey Walter, I think we missed a couple steps there.
    99 replies | 6533 view(s)
  • fisharmor's Avatar
    05-15-2024, 12:12 AM
    Hard cases make bad law. I think part of the issue is that, as far as my understanding takes me, we generally discuss what should and should not be controlled by statute. I don't think anything should be controlled by statute. I think we should have common law courts handle all cases and we should apply common law everywhere, so that we can allow for hard cases to be treated specially, without having the state create artificial support for the idea of abortion, the way it does now. If the woman legitimately *has* to have one, and the physician knows that he's going to be defending his action in front of a court that may or may not decide in his favor, then "health and safety of the mother" takes on an entirely new realism that doesn't currently exist.
    99 replies | 6533 view(s)
  • fisharmor's Avatar
    05-14-2024, 07:54 AM
    I've twisted nothing. If you believe that individual firearms ownership is sufficient to stop organized aggression, as you have just stated, then that conflicts with your statement that we need a state to stop organized aggression. Then you further undermined the 2A by saying "The good people have the right to the means to defend themselves". You put qualifiers on "people" that don't exist in the text of the 2nd Amendment. This means you don't believe people have an inherent right to defend themselves. It also means you choose to have the state define "good". Since the state can by definition do this arbitrarily, you are arguing there's no such thing as rights at all.
    66 replies | 2707 view(s)
  • fisharmor's Avatar
    05-13-2024, 12:59 PM
    And now you've finally added being anti-2A to your list.
    66 replies | 2707 view(s)
  • fisharmor's Avatar
    05-10-2024, 02:10 PM
    This doesn't say anything positive about your ability to assess value.
    646 replies | 59117 view(s)
  • fisharmor's Avatar
    05-10-2024, 08:57 AM
    I thought about this very deeply for about 10 years. I had all sorts of other deep thinkers guiding my deep thought on it and I came to a rooted-in-deep-thought conclusion on it. Then I saw my first picture of a tiny severed human arm sitting next to a US quarter for scale, and I realized that long thought's primary purpose is to defeat first principles. If you write enough and think enough you can make the US constitution support gun control. If you write and think enough you can make the Bible support homosexuality. I'm all about modifying or tossing first principles - but there have to be first principles intact for any system of thought to work. If your first principles are consistent then they fit like puzzle pieces neatly in any other argument. If they're not consistent or if you violate them when you've "thought about it long enough" then your system of thought is a mess that, as acptulsa already pointed out, is intentionally caused to lead us to a particular political outcome. And one of the first principles I'm operating under is the idea that all life is special and human life is more special than any other life. If that's not a first principle then property rights don't work. Liberty doesn't work.
    85 replies | 2490 view(s)
  • fisharmor's Avatar
    05-09-2024, 07:13 PM
    First they convinced a critical mass of people to breathe their own exhaust for a year and a half. Then they convinced a critical mass of teenagers to cut off their tits. But don't worry, everyone, they totally won't convince women to kill their children. 'Cause apparently they draw a line for what self-harm they'll convince people to do. I'm not sure how a guy who is supposed to be critical of the vaccination situation would be even capable of thinking that.
    85 replies | 2490 view(s)
  • fisharmor's Avatar
    05-09-2024, 11:53 AM
    I've tried twice to shift focus to the idea that Rand sucks at making endorsements. The endorsement of another RINO progressive big government anti-liberty candidate was the topic, right? I don't need Rand to be the guy who slit the throat of the revolution to loathe what he does with endorsements.
    27 replies | 1199 view(s)
  • fisharmor's Avatar
    05-09-2024, 11:44 AM
    Well, my total debt load is about 240% of my gross earnings. That's only because of my mortgage. I don't go into debt except in rare cases where I can get a new card or LOC that will increase my credit rating, and only to buy something that I already have the money for, but at 0% interest, and I pay it off before the interest kicks in. The other point to be made is, there's literally no other way I could have gotten a house. I mean I could have spent the last 20 years scrimping and saving and then been able to move into a house now, but I wouldn't have had the equity, or been able to make the updates, etc, etc, all the reasons people have mortgages. My point is this: debt is bad. Any debt. It's all bad. Now I'm one who would argue exactly none the stuff this lady is talking about spending tax money on is even necessary or desirable, but for the sake of argument let's say some of it is. Let's pretend the US military isn't a gigantic pork project to create Moloch. If that's not what it is, then we ought to be able to get by on something far less expansive than what we have. A tiny, elite expeditionary force, plus an identically sized national guard to what we have now, plus some pinpoint-accurate hypersonic low-yield missiles, would amount to 10% or so of what we're currently spending. And some forehead-slappingly obvious logic applied to each of those other categories would result in similar reductions in spending.
    4 replies | 699 view(s)
  • fisharmor's Avatar
    05-09-2024, 08:59 AM
    I didn't make that accusation. I pointed out that Ron Paul had not dropped out of the race. PAF confirmed this, and so did you. But I'm well aware the position of this site is that Rand did the right thing in 2012. I had intended to talk about Rand's endorsements, not the 2012 election. I'm stuck with a binary problem here: either endorsements mean something, or they don't mean anything. I don't speak swamp creature and I don't respond to Schrodinger's Endorsement that is obviously intended to drum up support but also doesn't have any harmful political effects. If the endorsement means something, then you don't give them to dirtbag politicians who support multiple positions ostensibly antithetical to yours. If the endorsement doesn't mean anything, then it's a waste of time and attention. I guess there's a third potential option: the endorsement means something but is essentially being traded for personal benefit.
    27 replies | 1199 view(s)
  • fisharmor's Avatar
    05-08-2024, 02:12 PM
    Well it's nice to know how slimy he is... but everyone here wants to forget or not acknowledge that Rand endorsed Mitt fucking Romney before his father Ron Paul, the guy this forum is named after, had dropped out of the race. If I was running for reelection I'd politely ask Rand to please keep his endorsements pointed at the swamp creatures.
    27 replies | 1199 view(s)
  • fisharmor's Avatar
    05-02-2024, 01:23 PM
    We're eight years into this guy's involvement in national politics, and you still think he thinks like you. He doesn't think like you. There is some other reason for him going. Either you're wrong about that number, or there's something else. Note that I never said he was going to get votes from convention attendees.
    188 replies | 7505 view(s)
  • fisharmor's Avatar
    05-02-2024, 12:40 PM
    I stopped shopping at Lidl several months ago. I walked up to the staffed checkouts and none was open. I asked one of the three employees standing around doing nothing, "Hey, which checkout is open?" He said they'll open one if I'm paying cash: otherwise I have to self checkout. "Hey man, I don't work here, and now you get to handle my groceries anyway but not get the money" as I walk away from my cart and TF out the store. Had fish and ice cream in there, too. If you don't like the self-checkouts, don't use them. Aldi seems to have figured out how to pay their checkers a decent wage and still get you out faster than anyone in history, and they get to sit down, too. Go there.
    7 replies | 1192 view(s)
  • fisharmor's Avatar
    05-02-2024, 12:34 PM
    https://orthodoxwiki.org/George_the_Trophy-bearer Yeah. Great name for a newly seceded city. :rolleyes:
    172 replies | 20443 view(s)
  • fisharmor's Avatar
    05-02-2024, 09:06 AM
    Yeah we're talking past each other. I agree, it's nothing to be proud of. By saying that, you're agreeing that it is what is. It's all legal, it's all above board, and it's how he at least maintains his wealth, irrespective whether he gained any more. What I'm trying to get across is that this is the wavelength his brain is on. He doesn't give a shit about liberty, he doesn't give a shit about the Republican party, he doesn't give a shit about any of the things SS talks about here. He's doing his own thing. He's figured out how to do that and still have the people working for his companies to essentially like him - he knows how to spend the minimum amount of time and money scratching their backs in order to get his agenda progressed. He blew that up into a nationwide scam and it worked. I can't see any other reason for him to go to the LP convention. Mark my words: he's going to say things like "ok I agree with you on that point and I'm very in favor of that". He's not going to repeat anything back to anyone. All he's going to do is give the same hollow assurances that have gotten him this far in life. A large number of people are going to believe him, and he's going to walk away with votes.
    188 replies | 7505 view(s)
  • fisharmor's Avatar
    05-02-2024, 08:43 AM
    Yes. That is part of what I was saying. DJT is hardwired to use other people for his own purposes. It's essentially sociopathy.
    188 replies | 7505 view(s)
  • fisharmor's Avatar
    05-02-2024, 08:41 AM
    If you take a lowball of his net worth, 4.7bn, then that means you're saying real estate has increased over 1000 fold in the last 50 years. That's ignoring that the Trump Organization has a revenue of at least 400 million annually. It's also ignoring the fact that the bigger your purse the harder the feds come for it, so you at least have to work on it not getting picked apart. Even if you're right, and all he did was hold on to what he was given, then that's still something that requires more effort than you're crediting him for, and a type of effort neither of us understands.
    188 replies | 7505 view(s)
  • fisharmor's Avatar
    05-02-2024, 06:53 AM
    Well, everything about the LP inviting him to speak makes sense, especially since it was made it clear one of the biggest points is to rub his nose in some of the things he did already. But from Trump's standpoint, you're right, it makes zero sense. He didn't go to the GOP debates because he didn't need to, and it looked better for him in the long run not to. If that's the calculus, then the only reason for him to go to the LP convention is the reverse - he thinks he needs to, or that it will look better in the long run for him to do it. I don't make a secret of my negative feelings for Trump... but unlike those with positive feelings for him, I can actually put my feelings aside for a second and recognize that Trump doesn't operate on the same wavelength as anyone else. He does what he does for reasons that aren't on anyone's map. My personal analysis of the man is that this is probably how he made his fortune - taking actions that nobody else understands and then walking away with millions is pretty par for the course for billionaires. I think that's everyone's problem with him - you just can't tell what's going on in his head. That's what drives the Left crazy - any other R candidate is preferable because they can all be anticipated and therefore controlled. I mean that's the only explanation I can think of for why they're still so batshit crazy about Trump despite getting a lot of things they wanted during his term. I suppose that's the dumb thing about inviting him - McArdle said in the video above that they want to preach libertarianism to him so much he repeats it back to them. Ok good luck with that - the dude says all sorts of things and then does the exact opposite. Because whatever is going on in his head, he seems to be good at doing the math and figuring out that if his personal agenda requires him to do something like create a federal program to assist in gender transitions for middle schoolers, he can go ahead and do it because he knows what the fallout will be before even trying and he knows it's not going to make people hate him more than Biden.
    188 replies | 7505 view(s)
  • fisharmor's Avatar
    05-01-2024, 08:56 AM
    Jessica
    3 replies | 245 view(s)
  • fisharmor's Avatar
    04-30-2024, 12:41 PM
    OMG who TF cares at this point. The system is rigged. Welcome to the 20th century, everyone. Trump promised to burn some of this nonsense to the ground. He didn't. He hired people who were responsible for it. Now it's biting him in the rear. Screw him.
    46 replies | 2383 view(s)
More Activity

4 Visitor Messages

  1. View Conversation
    A Liberty candidate needs your help!

    Donate today to Thomas Massie with $20.12 or something bigger! http://www.thomasmassie.com/

    For Liberty!
  2. View Conversation
    Sorry Fortis... I'm pretty new, too... you're not neg rep'ing me, you just don't have enough rep points to give + rep's yet. I haven't gotten neg rep's yet, and apparently they're red... yours are gray on my control panel... once you gain enough rep points, they'll turn green. lol I have no idea... I'll kick some + rep your way as re-payment.
  3. View Conversation
    Thanks (regarding my post). I don't really worry about the rep thing, I was just curious what about the post you didn't like.

    By the way, you negative rep'd me again in the Glenn Beck thread. lol
  4. View Conversation
    just curious why you negative rep'd me for my post in your thread...?
Showing Visitor Messages 1 to 4 of 4
About FortisKID

Basic Information

Date of Birth
August 10, 1993 (30)
Political Campaign Skills
Video and Audio:
Video Producer
Marketers:
Online Marketer

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
73
Posts Per Day
0.01
Visitor Messages
Total Messages
4
Most Recent Message
04-26-2012 12:16 AM
General Information
Last Activity
09-19-2012 04:46 PM
Join Date
10-12-2010
Referrals
3

10 Friends

  1. A Son of Liberty A Son of Liberty is offline

    Member

    A Son of Liberty
  2. Carehn Carehn is offline

    Member

    Carehn
  3. fisharmor fisharmor is online now

    Member

    fisharmor
  4. LibertyIn08 LibertyIn08 is offline

    Member

    LibertyIn08
  5. R3volutionJedi R3volutionJedi is offline

    Member

    R3volutionJedi
  6. ryanmkeisling ryanmkeisling is offline

    Member

    ryanmkeisling
  7. Southron Southron is offline

    Member

    Southron
  8. t0rnado t0rnado is offline

    Banned

    t0rnado
  9. Theocrat Theocrat is offline

    Member

    • Send a message via Skype™ to Theocrat
    Theocrat
  10. Vessol Vessol is offline

    Member

    Vessol
Showing Friends 1 to 10 of 10
No results to display...
No results to display...
No results to display...