You keep posting the same vague opaque hogwash over and over.Let me help you out here. The postings are not vague. You are being interrogated. You have been picked off the streets of violent protests and shoved into an unmarked van. Why do you Enable them? You should be Horrified. What is the nature of your Game?
You are clueless. I’d like to have some Sympathy for you … but what continues to Puzzle me … is the nature of your Game.
Jeebers! You guys are SO F’d up in your crap beliefs.
Liberals aren’t the problem here. Lie-believers and Lie-spreaders, like you are the problem. There is not continuous mass looting, and rioting and property destruction as you would have us believe. There is a small element of that among the VAST majority of PEACEFUL demonstrating.
But now the LIES metastasize. Bill Barr of the Dept of InJustice, has decided to proclaim some democratic led cities to be centers of ANARCHY. This is the kind of LIES that you guys want to be true. They intend to use this BS proclamation to withhold federal funds to those cities. This will have the effect of DEFUNDING necessary services, INCLUDING THE POLICE!
My prediction that klinko would continue with the same lame postings, was spot on.
I make lots of predictions on the forums. And I am correct the overwhelming % of the time. Thus I am believable. You guys are just spouting your distorted LIES. You are not believable except by other LIE-believers.
We all should have much sympathy for the liberals. Think about it; Hilary was the best they had in 2016. Sad. Now Joe is the best they have in 2020. Very sad. At least there are not so many who hate him as there were, and still are, who hated her. Mostly the right just fears the potential for a push back towards socialism. Joe doesn’t have the vision or the energy to do the pushing. If he gets in he will be Pelosi’s puppet.
We should have much sympathy for all of us; what we really need is term limits. Our politicians on both sides don’t give a rip about anything except getting reelected. Only a reboot will fix our current mess. Neither side will vote out their guys and gals; we’re too afraid of the imagined horrors the other guys will perpetrate on us. It has to be term limits.
Repetitive posts and a lack of engagement with the conversation are violations of the rules, Klinko. I allowed it when you were on a single thread about ‘seeing red’, but keep yourself limited.
@lausten Repetitive posts and a lack of engagement with the conversation are violations of the rules, Klinko. I allowed it when you were on a single thread about ‘seeing red’, but keep yourself limited.I am not going to respond when they try to divert the conversation off the topic. They repetitively divert and talk about the candidates. The candidates are off topic, because the OP is about what the Liberals have become. It's not about the candidates. There is a certain level of Depravity with who the Liberals are Enabling and who the Liberals are Accepting. They will not answer the point of the OP which is that it seems like a Game that they are playing ... but it Puzzles me ... as to the nature of that Game. If I am repetitive it is because they will not talk about the OP.
Mr. Klinko has entered 13 posts and his message is still scrambled and completely unintelligible. His above statement that “they repetitively divert and talk about the candidates” is an odd comment considering that the candidates are the central focus of every election and appropriately so.
I remember years ago being in my sisters’ kitchen when she was cleaning her cupboards. It didn’t take long for her 5-year old son to find an empty pot and spoon and just start banging repeatedly. Taking it away didn’t help much because he’d start screaming making even more noise than his banging. She finally gave him a wooden spoon to soften the incessant pounding and said to me, “He just wants attention. He’ll have to grow out of it.”
People who keep repeating the same garbled nonsense are no different.
In response to Ibelieveveinlogic,
The above-posted assertion that “what we really need is term limits” is an ill-considered opinion. We already have “term limits” and they come every two years with congressional elections. Term limits are simply a way for the electorate to excuse themselves from paying attention to important issues. In a participatory democracy, the critical ingredient is the informed vote that every citizen should cast in every election. That is the only legitimate means by which a representative’s term is limited. That requires voter vigilance and paying attention.
It’s almost certain that the originators of the constitution thought about writing term limits into its provision but wisely declined, because they knew it should be the responsibility of citizens to decide when a representative’s term should end, not an arbitrary limit on how long they can serve. That puts the onus squarely on all of us to pay attention and cast an informed vote. “Term limits” is just an excuse for uninformed voters to stay disengaged.
They will not answer the point of the OP which is that it seems like a Game that they are playing … but it Puzzles me … as to the nature of that Game. – Klinko
So, you want people to explain what it means to be a liberal? That’s going to be different things to different people, so it may not appear “on topic” to you. If you are only accepting a certain answer, then you are not really asking a question. That seems more like what you are doing. Here’s a succinct answer from Bertrand Russell, one I really like.
“The essence of the Liberal outlook lies not in what opinions are held, but in how they are held: instead of being held dogmatically, they are held tentatively, and with a consciousness that new evidence may at any moment lead to their abandonment.”― Bertrand Russell
The candidates are off topic, because the OP is about what the Liberals have become.It took 4 pages for you to FINALLY explain what the F you have been trying to get at. Which appears to be a lame effort to portray people who tend to vote Democratic as sad, depraved game players.
Wow. Ever heard of the black pot calling the silver kettle black?
Oh my jelly beans! Look at what the RepugLIARS and tRump cultists have become.
Both parties try to gain power. (WTF do you think political elections are? You can call it a game. But it is no big mystery.)
There is a certain level of Depravity with who the Liberals are Enabling and who the Liberals are Accepting.You refer to the candidates here in the same post that you excuse your vagueness and repetitiveness by claiming you would not respond to posts that involve candidates. So look at yourself. You are full of it. Your OP WAS about what you think is a poor choice of candidates. You make a typical RepugLIAR.
The Dems want to control govt, so that they can govern in ways that support the people. THAT IS THE NATURE OF THEIR GAME, as you put it.
Now what is the nature of the RepugLIARS game?
They want to control govt so as to support the whims and poorly informed tRump in getting all the power he wants. (Not that he will use that power to support the people. He has shown that he wants power in order to get more power and adulation for himself.)
The RepugLIARs are no longer a political party as much as a cult, driven towards establishing tRump as an autocrat. That doesn’t seem to be very wise considering the lack of ability to protect us during crises. Considering that he has always been only about getting more and more power and adulation for himself, with no priority for the American people’s well being.
It is not the Liberals that have morphed in to some new dysfunctional state. It is the RepugLIARS fall, their devolution into a force that is in the act of trying to DESTROY democracy. They are the freaks you should be concerned about (were you not one of them).
So explain that. How did what used to be the Republican Party, devolve into the atrocity (of RepugLIARS) that it is now?
So, you want people to explain what it means to be a liberal?No. Mr.Klinko said the OP is about what the Liberals have become.
Here’s a succinct answer from Bertrand Russell, one I really like.Mr. Russell was from a bygone era and nothing like what the Liberals have become.
In a participatory democracy, the critical ingredient is the informed vote that every citizen should cast in every election. That is the only legitimate means by which a representative’s term is limited.The first error in your thinking is that we have a "participatory democracy". The term "participatory" adds nothing to "democracy". That is the standard Dem lie, the basis for their push for the popular vote to elect a President. Apparently the socialists, aka the Democratic Party, have been fooled into believing that we have a single nation state divided into States rather than autonomous States joined into a nation. There is a big difference.
Term limits will be legitimate when we have a Constitutional amendment making them the law of the land.
... the originators of the constitution thought about writing term limits into its provision but wisely declined, because they knew it (should) only could be the responsibility of the citizens of each State to decide when a representative’s term should end, ...Editing in bold is mine. The originators understood States rights, a concept lost to the Democratic party of today. Fortunately our Constitution can be amended when necessary. When the lust for power, as we see in Congress today, overrides the desire for a "more perfect union" we need to amend the Constitution to limit any one individual's power. That power increases with length in office. The reasoning is the same as for limiting the terms a President can serve: power corrupts.
Politics has always been about “what’s in it for me”. The people will not vote out those who pander to their desires. Term limits will protect us from us.
@lausten: They will not answer the point of the OP which is that it seems like a Game that they are playing … but it Puzzles me … as to the nature of that Game. — KlinkoSo, you want people to explain what it means to be a liberal? That’s going to be different things to different people, so it may not appear “on topic” to you. If you are only accepting a certain answer, then you are not really asking a question. That seems more like what you are doing. Here’s a succinct answer from Bertrand Russell, one I really like.
In response to ibelieveinlogic,
We live in a democracy where the legitimacy of the government is derived through an election driven process. No one takes a seat in Congress without getting a plurality of votes cast by the people. If you’re saying that this process can be corrupted and suborned I agree but this is a matter for increased citizen vigilance and even more "participation. Elections are "participatory. Are they not? Your above statement that “participatory” adds nothing to democracy is nugatory. This is your error, not mine.
Your statement that “politics has always been about what’s in it for me” is a cynical shortsighted view of our democracy. Self-interest has always motivated humans to seek what advantages they could but this is a general condition of getting on with our lives and trying to provide for ourselves. It doesn’t logically follow that “politics is all about what’s in it for me.” It’s about a lot of things that are beneficial to people like roads, and health care, and a guaranteed retirement income.
You lastly say that we need term limits to protect us from us. If you mean we’ve come to a point where Americans have learned how to vote themselves largesse through government programs through politicians who sponsor them, I partially agree but it’s worth remembering term limits will not solve this problem.
The key to solving all of our national problems is and remains a fully informed and fully “participating” electorate.
Liberal is a broad term.
Saying ‘liberals’, " Enable and Accept … Window Breakers and Building Burners … America Haters and Capitalist Haters … [blah… blah… blah]", is like saying Christians enable and accept parents who kill their children because they believe God told them to or gun advocates accept toddlers accidentally shooting someone (although they do enable that) or all environmentalists spike trees and pour sugar in the fuel tanks of logging equipment or all atheists are brilliant and generous.
You shouldn’t paint everyone who falls under a label with the same brush because it simply isn’t true.
So much to respond. So little patience with people who repeat this crap.
What it classically means to be a Liberal is irrelevant.You asked what it means to be liberal. To me, the classic definition is what it means. If I asked someone what it means to be a Republican, and they said they were an "Eisenhower" Republican, I would accept that. A description cannot be irrelevant.
What I want to know is Why do Liberals Now, at this point in time, Enable and Accept … Window Breakers and Building Burners … America Haters and Capitalist Haters … Police Defunders and Police Dismantlers … Statue Topplers and History Rewriters … Race Baiters and Riot Sympathizers … and even Police Assassins and Death to Police Chanters?I can't speak for others. I don't accept those things. I have some issues with capitalism. I saw our police getting weaponized and thought that was wrong starting way back in the early part of this century. I'm not going to go through your list because we would never agree on the meanings of the words. And by "never", I mean a very long time. If you choose to be more reasonable, we could agree, but I have serious doubts. On a couple of them, I could ask you the same question.
I am sure you yourself will deny these things but I hear Enabling words and Accepting words from the Liberal/Media/Commentators.I'm not denying anything. We live in a country with free speech. I'm not going to write a blog, or go punch in the nose every moron who says something stupid about how to solve the country's problems. Again, take anything a BLM or Antifa said that you don't like, and google it, but also add "right wing moron with a gun". You'll find it.
They for sure are playing the Game because they probably don’t actually want to Enable and Accept these people, but they they do it anyway. I cannot determine if the Game is only about Votes or if the Depravity of the Game goes Deeper than that. What is the nature of their Game?If you don't think the way Trump speaks, the way McConnell says one thing and does another, and all the other things conservatives are doing is not "game playing", then I don't know what you are talking about.
If you don’t think the way Trump speaks, the way McConnell says one thing and does another, and all the other things conservatives are doing is not “game playing”, then I don’t know what you are talking about.You are not addressing Mr.Klinko's answer despite forcing him to spit it out. Please help him out with his Puzzle:
I cannot determine if the Game is only about Votes or if the Depravity of the Game goes Deeper than that. What is the nature of their Game?What is your best guess, Lausten?
What is your best guess, Lausten? -- SreeMy best guess is you don't know how to have a respectful discussion. This has been a fallacious question from the get go. I try to avoid naming fallacies, but I'm hoping you understand you are doing it. No politician today could be "only about getting votes". You have to offer something, like law and order. Trump is playing that card, but he is playing it so poorly, it's not working. Biden and other Democrats have a track record of law and order and are discussing the current situation reasonably. Asking if my depravity goes deeper is so obviously a childish insult there is no point in responding to it.
klinko: What I want to know is Why do Liberals Now, at this point in time, Enable and Accept...I shall answer your gas-lighting RepugLIAR rhetorical question with its multiple FALSE implications, with a similar but reality based question for you.
Why do RepugLIARs (enablers and cult followers of the tRump emerging autocrat) Now, at this point in time Enable and Accept …
Man, I could have gone on and on and on with that list. Seriously, on and on and on and on.
But I will conclude this post by saying the “game” as you call it, is deadly serious. The tRump intends to steal the coming election one way or another. If he succeeds, he will complete his mission to turn our country in to his own personal Autocracy.
Bogus fear mongering about “socialism” and anti-capitalism are ridiculous. We all love our country and we are all capitalists (even the Democratic Socialists are capitalists).
However, Fears about the tRump completing his agenda of undermining all of the previous institutional and Constitutional checks on his power, ARE BASED ON OUR UNFOLDING REALITY of the tRump’s entire reign, including what he continues doing NOW.
Now that he sees he will likely LOSE the VOTE, he has claimed over and over in the past week, that the election will be contested because he is CONTINUALLY LYING ABOUT mail in ballots being fraudulent. He substantiates none of these LIES, but he doesn’t need to. He just needs to create enough doubt on the elections that it will be contested.
He wants the election to be contested because that is his best bet on remaining in power. He can’t win the Vote because he is SUCH A PATHETICALLY INCOMPETENT leader. But he may well be able to steal the election by other means.
Yes, if this is a game, as you call it, it is a deadly serious game. One that can result in (what was the USA) becoming a dictatorship of the tRump’s.
So screw anyone who calls me an America Hater. I love America. Those who enable and accept the tRump leadership, and spread his propaganda, are AMERICA DESTROYERS.
If guys like you and the tRump get their way, then what we have known as America, will be no more.
There is a certain level of Depravity with who the Liberals are Enabling and who the Liberals are Accepting.Coming from a trumpster, that's the height of hypocrisy, or perhaps it's simply lunacy - but all that's old news isn't it.