And I agree that the crazies on BOTH sides are ruining things more than those in the middle.
Tell me the specific public policy positions on the right held by people that you call "crazies". Like I said, the right is more or less unchanged.
The left is WAY WAY further left. S#it like defunding the police is total insanity, stuff that has never ever been a consideration in public discourse on the left or right.
What is crazy about the right? lower taxes, smaller federal government, less federal government spending.....none of that is "crazy", just like none of the traditional "liberal" views are "crazy". You can agree or disagree in saying that lower taxes / smaller scope of the federal government is better or worse, but it's not "crazy".
Many if not most of the woke positions and people who promote them are crazy. Jimmy Carter wasn't saying any of those things. Neither was Bill Clinton back in the day. Bill Clinton's public policy was not crazy. AOC is crazy. Trump is rude and obnoxious, sure, but if you write his public policy positions on paper and hide the author, nobody would say they are crazy and it's pretty much what people on the right have always said.
I completely agree. Liberals want to give kids free food in schools. Whats next? They'll want free food from grocery stores and restaurants too?
it's more like liberals are still liberals, but the people that you call liberals aren't really liberals. They are more like communists and they promote totalitarianism. Liberals loved privacy, individual rights, hated big bother and big corporate interests and the military industrial complex.
Um...huh? First of all, INCORRECT!
Second of all, Abortion Rights that Democrats support are all about PRIVACY and individual rights...PRIVACY is why Roe V. Wade happened in the first place (upheld by a then REPUBLICAN-led Supreme Court by the way).
Communists and totalitarianism? Who spoon feeds you this crap?
Abortion is a special and highly complex issue that almost stands alone outside of more typical left and right issues.
But another way to look at it is that the government is protecting the privacy of the unborn child. They have a right not to be murdered.
Nah...I got three out of three. AND, you have introduced something new that you are wrong about...disrespect for the police has not gone too far. THEY (the police) have misbehaved, and THEY (the police) have some learnin' and changin' to do before respect is regained.
I gave you the third one!
I am not GIVEN anything. I TOOK all three points. I am right on all of them.
Second of all, Abortion Rights that Democrats support are all about PRIVACY and individual rights...PRIVACY is why Roe V. Wade happened in the first place (upheld by a then REPUBLICAN-led Supreme Court by the way).
Communists and totalitarianism? Who spoon feeds you this crap?
Abortion is a special and highly complex issue that almost stands alone outside of more typical left and right issues.
But another way to look at it is that the government is protecting the privacy of the unborn child. They have a right not to be murdered.
NOPE! There is no such thing as an "unborn child." Before birth, it is either an embryo or a fetus depending on stage of development.
This is result of 24 hour fake news and social media. I don’t care it’s Fox News, cnn, or msnbc. They make money dividing us. On top of that social media is a platform for a few idiots to have a giant megaphone. So technology is to blame for the current mess.
I have to call you out on this. I know you have good intellect but sometimes your stubborness can trump your intellect.
Lets start with your #2 point. This is what I actually posted, "We valued equality over equity." Is this true or not true? Of course its true we didn't really know what equity was back then. So yes we valued equality much much more equity. And, I didn't say we valued equality more then than now. Some today are really big on equity even if it means preferential selection for some groups. (This has worked against Asian Americans going to the Ivies)
As far as point 1, that is based more on my anecdotal experiential information. I knew many gun owners, I knew of no one who bought guns back then to fight off the government. I didn't even hear of the concept. But now it is quite common. Young fella, you are wrong on that one too. I was there.
As far as your point three, I will give you that one. But I will say disrespect for the police may have gone too far but that is subjective and I do agree with you that there are major problems to address.
1 out of three isn't that bad but you can do better.
Nah...I got three out of three. AND, you have introduced something new that you are wrong about...disrespect for the police has not gone too far. THEY (the police) have misbehaved, and THEY (the police) have some learnin' and changin' to do before respect is regained.
Flagpole is the first A hole who would call the police if his motion light went on or he saw a black man on his block. Punks like this need to be exposed.
Abortion is a special and highly complex issue that almost stands alone outside of more typical left and right issues.
But another way to look at it is that the government is protecting the privacy of the unborn child. They have a right not to be murdered.
NOPE! There is no such thing as an "unborn child." Before birth, it is either an embryo or a fetus depending on stage of development.
Are you are telling me that ten minutes before a baby comes out of the mother it's not a person? It's not a person until it's outside of the mother? Before the c section it's not a person, after the c section it's a person? Is that what you are saying? Are you saying that it's fine to kill a "fetus" nine months in to pregnancy, just before birth?
This is result of 24 hour fake news and social media. I don’t care it’s Fox News, cnn, or msnbc. They make money dividing us. On top of that social media is a platform for a few idiots to have a giant megaphone. So technology is to blame for the current mess.
Don't forget bad parenting. I can't tell you how many kids I see that are raised by their phone or ipad.
Nah...I got three out of three. AND, you have introduced something new that you are wrong about...disrespect for the police has not gone too far. THEY (the police) have misbehaved, and THEY (the police) have some learnin' and changin' to do before respect is regained.
Flagpole is the first A hole who would call the police if his motion light went on or he saw a black man on his block. Punks like this need to be exposed.
I would say that this flagpole clown is the worst of lets run. And that's no small achievement. He is probably battling a mental disease. No joke. I'm not kidding or tolling. His response to my post will make it even more evident.
Every 40 years people say things were better 40 years ago.
You can trace that back when we had no electricity and your bathroom was outside the house. The good old days.
How do you figure that it is safe to assume that quality of life is monotonically increasing? Is it just because you can repeat cute phrases like, "the older you get, the better the past was" or do you have something more substantive to demonstrate this?
I think it must be noted that there is a cognitive bias about the good ol days.
I get a fuzzy warm feeling when I think about the 80s, mix tapes, video rental stores, B Dalton Books, Sam Goody music, Tony Hawk skateboards, rollerblades, pogs, marbles, baseball card trading, vision street wear shoes, morey boogey, stussy, epitaph records, etc. I begin to look back at the good ol days. What I'm actually doing is remembering the positive memories and association while leaving out all the negative experiences. In reality, I was too young and ignorant to even understand all the negative things as I saw the world through the eyes of an innocent child. What does a little kid know about the Iran Contra scandal or the adult world?
There never was good ol days. There was innocence, and then it gets lost. This is still true today and was true 100 years ago.
While all of that sounds good and has some truth to it, it does not really tell the whole story.
Your closing summary, "There never was good ol days. There was innocence, and then it gets lost. This is still true today and was true 100 years ago." is cute but not necessarily accurate.
There is no reason to assume that life today is automatically as good as, or better than, life 20 years ago or 50 years ago or ... Just because people tend to have fond memories of their youth does not mean that things overall are getting better for people.
Of course there are exceptions. If you were a jewish person growing up in Germany during the holocaust, there was no good ol days. This is the reality for some.
The point is that 'good ol days' is largely a very common cognitive bias.
People used to have to go to creepy movie theaters to watch porn. Now they take their phone out of their pocket.
People used to have to rely on encyclopedias or trust the smartest person in the room. Now, we have instant access to information.
People used to not have antibiotics or cars or planes or trains.
There's a very strong case for progress. But of course there will always be exceptions.
Every 40 years people say things were better 40 years ago.
You can trace that back when we had no electricity and your bathroom was outside the house. The good old days.
How do you figure that it is safe to assume that quality of life is monotonically increasing? Is it just because you can repeat cute phrases like, "the older you get, the better the past was" or do you have something more substantive to demonstrate this?
We have these amazing devices we carry with us where we can post on Letsrun, see the weather, the news, our money, anything we want.
Nah...I got three out of three. AND, you have introduced something new that you are wrong about...disrespect for the police has not gone too far. THEY (the police) have misbehaved, and THEY (the police) have some learnin' and changin' to do before respect is regained.
Flagpole is the first A hole who would call the police if his motion light went on or he saw a black man on his block. Punks like this need to be exposed.
Um...NOPE! Dude, I have neighbors from all all parts of the globe...black, white, Asian, Eastern European...a very diverse upper middle class neighborhood. I don't behave or think that way, brother.
Also, I didn't say that there aren't some good police officers. There clearly are, but there are far too many bad ones, and like a poisoned apple in a barrel, it is prudent to be wary these days of ANY police officer, ESPECIALLY if you have not called them for assistance with an issue.
Police officers routinely break the 4th Amendment. They very often use more force than necessary, and far too often, a police officer is found to have planted evidence or used their power of authority to do bad things. In most states you do not have to provide ID to an officer unless you are committing a crime, have committed a crime, or the police officer has reasonable suspicion that you are about to, and they must be specific to you about what that is. They can not require your ID if they are simply investigating a crime or if you look "out of place" or suspicious, and you should never provide your ID unless you have done those things (the crime stuff I listed). Cops have planted evidence more than enough times in the past that just ruins a person's life, so they can't be trusted.
Respect in general to police officers will return when they have earned it back.
NOPE! There is no such thing as an "unborn child." Before birth, it is either an embryo or a fetus depending on stage of development.
Are you are telling me that ten minutes before a baby comes out of the mother it's not a person? It's not a person until it's outside of the mother? Before the c section it's not a person, after the c section it's a person? Is that what you are saying? Are you saying that it's fine to kill a "fetus" nine months in to pregnancy, just before birth?
[sigh]
Dude, even before this getting rid of Roe v. Wade nonsense, abortions weren't performed with ANY regularity, and only if there was a direct threat to the life of the mother, on fetuses after 24 weeks, and in some states not after 20 weeks.
So, no, I didn't say it was fine to kill a fetus nine months into a pregnancy just before birth. I just gave you the proper definition of terms. There is no such thing as an "unborn child."
However, before it is born, it is a fetus (or an embryo if early on...debate on the timing ranging from 9 to 11 weeks after fertilization). It isn't a "child" or a "baby" until it is born. Before then it is a fetus. I didn't create the definitions. I just know what they are.
More Videos:TNT Run #1:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Br8JUraUHk&list=UUFoMSST2lkElDpf4BUUe2OA&spfreload=101v1 ft. SHoCKerMax: http://bit.ly/1zfMsCsSecond ...