Jump to content

Republicans vs Democrats- idiocracy


Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, JDHillFan said:

0EC116A6-CC9E-4DC3-B07A-EFCA819C923E.thumb.jpeg.0f220756c1f43ec09b58910310bfdf40.jpeg

 

Yeah this is about right. The only thing that's missing is the fact that people that just want to be left alone will always lose societal and political battles to those who wish to impose their will on others. It's time to re-define conservatism to something that actually has a battle plan.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, SoCal Deek said:

Once again Tibs, in case you missed the first 1,000 posts…you don’t have the right to end someone’s life. 

Good morning. 

 

It's just an eviction notice 

32 minutes ago, LeviF said:

 

Yeah this is about right. The only thing that's missing is the fact that people that just want to be left alone will always lose societal and political battles to those who wish to impose their will on others. It's time to re-define conservatism to something that actually has a battle plan.

What pisses you off the most, about not being left alone? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Over 29 years of fanhood said:

Republicans: everyone for themselves. Don’t make your problem my problem and I’ll do the same.

 

Democrats: everyone should have what I have but don’t take it from me to give to them. Take it from the people that have more than me. 
 

This is the two party idiocracy in nutshell 
 

 

 

HA!!!

 

What a joke.

 

The party of hypocrisy is so pathetic...

 

Aren't you an INDPENEDNENT? lolz

 

And get it right:

 

image.thumb.jpeg.bbf896fb8c41e7f367188a68849810a5.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Tiberius said:

Having money helps 

 

Yes, I'm not rich by any reasonable American standard but I had several non-random advantages that much of the population could also have with certain targeted legislation.

 

Somewhere along the way the American conservative movement got completely hijacked by corporate oligarchies and abandoned many of the principles of nation-building that made this country great. Somewhere between Hoover and Kennedy the US lost the mandate of heaven. Technocratic corporatism and managerial politics have led to this weird two-headed monster in our government that has completely lost sight of the average American citizen and worker in favor of CEOverlords and weird obsessions with narrow economic issues and principles that affect less than 10% of the population. Pile on top of that several gerontocrats refusing to give up power even as they slide into mental failure and we're left with a failed society.

 

For those of us with some means the effects of this are felt on a much smaller scale as we can: pick up and move to an area where we can be left to our own devices (USA is big and in many places is sparsely populated), find alternative routes for our children in education and trade, arrange communities that self-govern, etc. For the average American this is impossible, which is why the "leave me alone" camp will always lose: they fail to recognize or simply don't care that the people they claim to represent do not benefit from most of their political stances.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, JDHillFan said:

0EC116A6-CC9E-4DC3-B07A-EFCA819C923E.thumb.jpeg.0f220756c1f43ec09b58910310bfdf40.jpeg

Hahaha.. so true though. Its simple : Stop taking my money. Stop telling me I have to do this or that, say this or that, wear this or that, think this or that. Protect the border and put criminals in jail. Encourage energy production because that drives our economy. Leave me alone and stfu. It seems so easy , but libs make it so difficult. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, LeviF said:

 

Yes, I'm not rich by any reasonable American standard but I had several non-random advantages that much of the population could also have with certain targeted legislation.

 

Somewhere along the way the American conservative movement got completely hijacked by corporate oligarchies and abandoned many of the principles of nation-building that made this country great. Somewhere between Hoover and Kennedy the US lost the mandate of heaven. Technocratic corporatism and managerial politics have led to this weird two-headed monster in our government that has completely lost sight of the average American citizen and worker in favor of CEOverlords and weird obsessions with narrow economic issues and principles that affect less than 10% of the population. Pile on top of that several gerontocrats refusing to give up power even as they slide into mental failure and we're left with a failed society.

 

For those of us with some means the effects of this are felt on a much smaller scale as we can: pick up and move to an area where we can be left to our own devices (USA is big and in many places is sparsely populated), find alternative routes for our children in education and trade, arrange communities that self-govern, etc. For the average American this is impossible, which is why the "leave me alone" camp will always lose: they fail to recognize or simply don't care that the people they claim to represent do not benefit from most of their political stances.

But the average American was much better off in that period of history than before it. Maybe we are just spoiled 

24 minutes ago, Boatdrinks said:

Hahaha.. so true though. Its simple : Stop taking my money. Stop telling me I have to do this or that, say this or that, wear this or that, think this or that. Protect the border and put criminals in jail. Encourage energy production because that drives our economy. Leave me alone and stfu. It seems so easy , but libs make it so difficult. 

The war on drugs was mainly a Conservative thing 

And how about all those Conservatives crying their eyes out over a guy taking a knee. Wow

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Over 29 years of fanhood said:

Republicans: everyone for themselves. Don’t make your problem my problem and I’ll do the same.

 

Democrats: everyone should have what I have but don’t take it from me to give to them. Take it from the people that have more than me. 
 

This is the two party idiocracy in nutshell 
 

 


🎯

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Tiberius said:

But the average American was much better off in that period of history than before it. Maybe we are just spoiled 

 

 

I don't mean to sound like a douche but, define "better off." I didn't say things were bad for average Americans during many of those years but I think the precedents and the ideas put in motion in our government starting in that time period got us way off track with no course correction in the meantime.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, LeviF said:

 

I don't mean to sound like a douche but, define "better off." I didn't say things were bad for average Americans during many of those years but I think the precedents and the ideas put in motion in our government starting in that time period got us way off track with no course correction in the meantime.

Live longer, better health care, more time off, wealthier, access to more information, safer, travels more, more disposable income, crimes against women are actually crimes, less racism, less crime against homosexuals, much more security in old age, poverty is not nearly as bad as it use to be, less violence in general, birth control is now legal, you are not expected to get married, education has advanced, smoke less tobacco and a whole bunch of people can now get employment in jobs that used to be closed to them. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Tiberius said:

Live longer (some segments of the population), better health care (more health tech and effective meds but it's also much more expensive), more time off, wealthier (wealth gap is larger), access to more information (this is why I ask you to define better, this to me isn't necessarily better in all cases), safer, travels more (so?), more disposable income (to the detriment of actual wealth, the costs of which have outpaced average income increases), crimes against women are actually crimes, less racism, less crime against homosexuals, much more security in old age (the elderly were arguably more secure in pre-industrial society with better quality of life in old age), poverty is not nearly as bad as it use to be (what is meant by this? do we have less poverty? is being impoverished less of a burden now?), less violence in general (in general, sure, but it's also going up again), birth control is now legal (it always was), you are not expected to get married (again, why is this good?), education has advanced (so has the associated costs without much rise in benefits), smoke less tobacco and a whole bunch of people can now get employment in jobs that used to be closed to them. 

 

We're running into fundamental philosophical differences now but a lot of it hinges on what we consider a "quality" life. It's ok to differ on that but my problem with Conservative, Inc. is that they have swallowed whole the underlying theoretical premises of postmodern liberal thought and just added endless war and blind shilling for megacorps. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, LeviF said:

 

We're running into fundamental philosophical differences now but a lot of it hinges on what we consider a "quality" life. It's ok to differ on that but my problem with Conservative, Inc. is that they have swallowed whole the underlying theoretical premises of postmodern liberal thought and just added endless war and blind shilling for megacorps. 

Birth control was always legal? 

Hoover was not pre-industrial society, you are not making sense 

Violence down, life expectancy up and better health care are just facts. They are good things. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

Birth control was always legal? 

Hoover was not pre-industrial society, you are not making sense 

Violence down, life expectancy up and better health care are just facts. They are good things. 

 

 

 

Are you talking about the oral contraceptive? I think they didn't come around until the 60s? But there were other methods that yes, were legal. Some places criminalized the oral contraceptive in some situations but that disappeared fairly quickly.

 

Yeah Hoover was post-industrialization but you were saying that things are better for the elderly now than they ever have been, no? If not I read it wrong. But yeah early industrialization and urbanization was very hard on the elderly.

 

There are some semantic differences between "life expectancy up" and "people live longer." But all of those "good things" would have happened without the mainstream conservative heel-turn.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, LeviF said:

 

Are you talking about the oral contraceptive? I think they didn't come around until the 60s? But there were other methods that yes, were legal. Some places criminalized the oral contraceptive in some situations but that disappeared fairly quickly.

 

Yeah Hoover was post-industrialization but you were saying that things are better for the elderly now than they ever have been, no? If not I read it wrong. But yeah early industrialization and urbanization was very hard on the elderly.

 

There are some semantic differences between "life expectancy up" and "people live longer." But all of those "good things" would have happened without the mainstream conservative heel-turn.

I'm saying life has gotten way better since FDR was Prez, not neolithic revolution days. And birth control was banned by Conservatives totally in this country. Read about Comstock act 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

Birth control was always legal? 

Hoover was not pre-industrial society, you are not making sense 

Violence down, life expectancy up and better health care are just facts. They are good things. 

 

 

Violence is down? In which country are you referring to?

  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...