- Joined
- Nov 27, 2015
- Messages
- 10,004
It's amazing how polarizing these nominations are.
SCOTUS KENNEDY
- Thread starter user 7704
- Start date
Help Support Homesteading & Country Living Forum:
It's amazing how polarizing these nominations are.
They only polarizing because the left don't like them or I should say only because they are on Trump list, no more no less.
Its Brett Kavanaugh
- Joined
- Nov 27, 2015
- Messages
- 10,004
They are already protesting. Roe v Wade is all they think about.
Thats because they are sick demented people.
I say "Good". Let the left go wacko, and bring on Civil War 2.0. This is not going to end peacefully, a lot of people are going to get hurt. But the longer we wait, the more will get hurt/killed. I'm happy to wait for them to chose the time of their demise.
I don’t understand all this hatred between the two parties. Aren’t we on the same team? Someone above posted about America failing from within. Isn’t this heading in that direction? There should be a middle ground on all issues, no far right or left. Extremist are dangerous on both sides.
- Joined
- Nov 27, 2015
- Messages
- 10,004
As soon as they got their pre made signs out last night, they started that high pitched screeching that does nothing but irritate people.
They were armed with their (insert whomever is chosen) prepared speeches. I turned on all of the news channels and couldn't watch because it was so irritating. Elizabeth Warren was intolerable.
With all the problems for the SCOTUS to tackle, all they are worried about are women's rights. I'm a woman and that is way down my list of priorities.
They were armed with their (insert whomever is chosen) prepared speeches. I turned on all of the news channels and couldn't watch because it was so irritating. Elizabeth Warren was intolerable.
With all the problems for the SCOTUS to tackle, all they are worried about are women's rights. I'm a woman and that is way down my list of priorities.
Brent,
It's not really hate between 'parties' (aka Dem/Republican), but rather ideas/views. On some things, you can find a middle ground. In fact I'll say that the 'republicans' (not conservatives) have been surrendering to this 'middle ground' for years/decades with the left only dragging things further left.
There are some things you can find a middle ground. Left (L) wants free insurance for everyone (aka I pay for others), C (conservatives) say each pays their own way. The middle ground was a Medicaid/medicare for the impoverished and everyone else pays their own. But that wasn't good enough.
C believes all life is precious and L thinks every baby has a right to die (again, 'free', aka I pay for it). Middle ground was 50 years ago when each state chose their own abortion laws.
The problem is that individual States have no rights any more, the L wants to shove their wacko radical ideas on everyone and the C are fed up. I'm not sure you can find many things that the C have forced on everyone for these past 50 years, pushing it further year by year. I'd be curious if you can name some, I gave 2 examples that infuriate the C's (and I can list every more).
The point is, there is no 'middle ground' any more. With no State Rights, I cannot 'retreat' to a State that enacts the laws I want. And when you push a badger into a corner, he'll fight. And I think we're about at that point.
That is why the average American chose a 'fighter' like Trump to step in as President. We aren't going to take it any more. We don't care if it's ugly or really who gets hurt (too many have already gotten hurt on our side). I really couldn't care less what is 'tweeted' and who's feelings are hurt. Could not care LESS. We have nowhere else to retreat to, we've retreated FAR too much already, and we've drawn 'the red line'. Can you understand any of that?
It's not really hate between 'parties' (aka Dem/Republican), but rather ideas/views. On some things, you can find a middle ground. In fact I'll say that the 'republicans' (not conservatives) have been surrendering to this 'middle ground' for years/decades with the left only dragging things further left.
There are some things you can find a middle ground. Left (L) wants free insurance for everyone (aka I pay for others), C (conservatives) say each pays their own way. The middle ground was a Medicaid/medicare for the impoverished and everyone else pays their own. But that wasn't good enough.
C believes all life is precious and L thinks every baby has a right to die (again, 'free', aka I pay for it). Middle ground was 50 years ago when each state chose their own abortion laws.
The problem is that individual States have no rights any more, the L wants to shove their wacko radical ideas on everyone and the C are fed up. I'm not sure you can find many things that the C have forced on everyone for these past 50 years, pushing it further year by year. I'd be curious if you can name some, I gave 2 examples that infuriate the C's (and I can list every more).
The point is, there is no 'middle ground' any more. With no State Rights, I cannot 'retreat' to a State that enacts the laws I want. And when you push a badger into a corner, he'll fight. And I think we're about at that point.
That is why the average American chose a 'fighter' like Trump to step in as President. We aren't going to take it any more. We don't care if it's ugly or really who gets hurt (too many have already gotten hurt on our side). I really couldn't care less what is 'tweeted' and who's feelings are hurt. Could not care LESS. We have nowhere else to retreat to, we've retreated FAR too much already, and we've drawn 'the red line'. Can you understand any of that?
It’s simple really, the collective Vs individualism. This fight been going on a long time just that the age of instant news has amplified the fight and social media has turned it dangerous.
What these democratic socialist are protesting is nothing new. Saying that conservatives are against womens rights and dont care about there health. We do care and we also care about the life of human fetus and the future of all mankind. We do this by the path of Liberty and individual’s unalienable rights and the limits the Constitution places on the federal government. not by government enacting socialism and Fascism.
These tactics are not new:
Socialism, like the ancient ideas from which it springs, confuses the distinction between government and society. As a result of this, every time we object to a thing being done by government, the socialists conclude that we object to its being done at all.
We disapprove of state education. Then the socialists say that we are opposed to any education. We object to a state religion. Then the socialists say that we want no religion at all. We object to a state-enforced equality. Then they say that we are against equality. And so on, and so on. It is as if the socialists were to accuse us of not wanting persons to eat because we do not want the state to raise grain.
— Frédéric Bastiat, The Law — 1850
These tactics are not new:
Socialism, like the ancient ideas from which it springs, confuses the distinction between government and society. As a result of this, every time we object to a thing being done by government, the socialists conclude that we object to its being done at all.
We disapprove of state education. Then the socialists say that we are opposed to any education. We object to a state religion. Then the socialists say that we want no religion at all. We object to a state-enforced equality. Then they say that we are against equality. And so on, and so on. It is as if the socialists were to accuse us of not wanting persons to eat because we do not want the state to raise grain.
— Frédéric Bastiat, The Law — 1850
I think Mav is onto it, at least in part. Change 'collective' to federal, and 'individual' to State, and we are definitely aligned. So if you don't like the pro-life laws in state #1, call U-Haul and move to state #2. With federalism, States have no ability to decide for their own.
I'm not saying State #3 can allow slavery. There are 'limits', and those can easily be found in the Constitution. But it is a VERY SHORT list. And everything not specifically spelled out in that wonderful document is the domain of the individual State.
I'm not saying State #3 can allow slavery. There are 'limits', and those can easily be found in the Constitution. But it is a VERY SHORT list. And everything not specifically spelled out in that wonderful document is the domain of the individual State.
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2013
- Messages
- 18,694
When I was young, I remember that when someone did or said something that other people didn't like (but was not illegal), the phrase "Well, it's a free country" was used quite often. I never hear that anymore.
There are definitely changes in the brain when we age. They should be medically cleared yearly.
