Where the fuck do these people come from? Here we go.
tharkun:

stephenburnsred:

self-ownership:

Why I’m in:
Drone strikes
NDAA
Deportation of “illegal” immigrants
Guantanamo Bay
Anwar al-Awlaki
Raids on medical marijuana dispensaries
Military force in Iraq, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq, Yemen, Libya, …
But don’t worry guys. Obama has swag.

It’s almost amazing. These people are so bored with their lives that they have actually deluded themselves into living out a V for Vendetta fantasy.

Let’s answer this systematically 
1. Works, and I don’t care

Works in what way? In the way that it kills who it’s supposed to kill? Because it certainly doesn’t do that. If you mean we kill some people that are bad sometimes, sure. Does that excuse killing innocent human beings? No ma’am it does not.

2. Does less than you think

Right, it just gives the president the power to turn off the bill of rights at will. Not a big deal.

3. Paranoia on your part

Paranoia? What kind of shitty excuse is that? He’s deported more than a million “illegals” That’s just fact.

4. Don’t care

You don’t care that he broke a campaign promise that was pretty key to his election? Never mind the fact that he made that promise in a year where he had a re-election campaign to consider four years later that might call back to his track record. I can’t imagine the amount of promise breaking a lame duck Obama will do.

5. There’s no way I could care less about this then I already do

You don’t care that American citizens can be assassinated extra-judicially? Actually…I’ll let this one go. If you don’t mind that citizens can be killed without trial, maybe we can arrange you being next.

6. Not the President’s fault i.e. you don’t understand how government works

The president may not have issued the order himself, but he sure as hell could have put policy in to place that would have stopped it. Barney Frank seems to think it’s a problem. I’m sure he just doesn’t understand how government works too.

7. All those countries are borderline insane, so again….wait for it….I don’t care

What does this even mean? How can an entire country be insane? Some how I feel like that’s an incredibly extreme generalization. I would assume you mean the governments, but the governments aren’t the ones being attacked in all but one of those cases.

Do you actually live in the real world?

Yes, we do, we just understand it slightly better than you seem to.

Where the fuck do these people come from? Here we go.

tharkun:

stephenburnsred:

self-ownership:

Why I’m in:

  • Drone strikes
  • NDAA
  • Deportation of “illegal” immigrants
  • Guantanamo Bay
  • Anwar al-Awlaki
  • Raids on medical marijuana dispensaries
  • Military force in Iraq, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq, Yemen, Libya, …

But don’t worry guys. Obama has swag.

It’s almost amazing. These people are so bored with their lives that they have actually deluded themselves into living out a V for Vendetta fantasy.

Let’s answer this systematically 

1. Works, and I don’t care

Works in what way? In the way that it kills who it’s supposed to kill? Because it certainly doesn’t do that. If you mean we kill some people that are bad sometimes, sure. Does that excuse killing innocent human beings? No ma’am it does not.

2. Does less than you think

Right, it just gives the president the power to turn off the bill of rights at will. Not a big deal.

3. Paranoia on your part

Paranoia? What kind of shitty excuse is that? He’s deported more than a million “illegals” That’s just fact.

4. Don’t care

You don’t care that he broke a campaign promise that was pretty key to his election? Never mind the fact that he made that promise in a year where he had a re-election campaign to consider four years later that might call back to his track record. I can’t imagine the amount of promise breaking a lame duck Obama will do.

5. There’s no way I could care less about this then I already do

You don’t care that American citizens can be assassinated extra-judicially? Actually…I’ll let this one go. If you don’t mind that citizens can be killed without trial, maybe we can arrange you being next.

6. Not the President’s fault i.e. you don’t understand how government works

The president may not have issued the order himself, but he sure as hell could have put policy in to place that would have stopped it. Barney Frank seems to think it’s a problem. I’m sure he just doesn’t understand how government works too.

7. All those countries are borderline insane, so again….wait for it….I don’t care

What does this even mean? How can an entire country be insane? Some how I feel like that’s an incredibly extreme generalization. I would assume you mean the governments, but the governments aren’t the ones being attacked in all but one of those cases.

Do you actually live in the real world?

Yes, we do, we just understand it slightly better than you seem to.

Dear Mitt Romney…

statistsgonnastate:

the-nu-flesh:

logicallypositive:

I’m voting for Obama because I love the smell of napalm and the searing flesh of Afghani children in the morning

Oh, please. Don’t act like the republican party is anti-war. It’s pathetic how the right switches tunes the second a democrat is in office.

Wut.

That awkward moment when someone implies Justin is part of “the right”. LOLOLOL

Libertarianism. Look it up.


Friend of the People: It's funny when you hear conservatives talk about liberty.

nonyap:

The first thing that jumped out at me as I read this blog was the fact that he used “Freedom” and “liberty” in the same sentence as if they had two different meaning…

Here’s the definition of Liberty:

: the quality or state of being free: a : the power to do as one pleases b : freedom from physical restraint c : freedom from arbitrary or despotic control d : the positive enjoyment of various social, political, or economic rights and privileges

And here’s the definition of Freedom:

: the quality or state of being free: as a : the absence of necessity, coercion, or constraint in choice or action b : liberation from slavery or restraint or from the power of another : independence

Essentially, the two words are the same.  But anyway….

The blogger seems to think that the idea of forcing others to conform to a certain  point of view is limited to…well…conservatives.  Here what was written:

“Conservatives seem to feel that without a government to tell you what to do the world becomes an immoral place, full of the vices and addictions that humans would never be able to control.”  He is implying that conservatives want “big government” to tell us all what to do. 

I could change the word to Liberals and make the same point.  I ask you who is it that is insisting that the government make it so that MacDonalds has to stop advertising to children so that they aren’t pressuring their  parents to buy those Happy Meals?  Who is it that put in place such restrictive laws on public smoking? Who is it that has made it so farmers can’t farm a field in which a tiny mouse might live?  Who is it that has shut down the water to the California farms to save a wee fishie? The truth is, almost every move the Liberal makes as regards to being governed is to have the government impose more restrictions on individual freedoms in order to “force societal change”. For government to be bigger and have a louder voice in our daily lives….

The blogger then writes that the voters choose by “majority rule” the politicians who write the laws - like the ones on making pot illegal or other vices he believes that conservatives believe that the masses would cling to - and if they (the voters) really wanted to be “immoral” they’d vote in only those who would write laws that allowed them to be immoral.  Since that hasn’t happened, he implies that therefore the voters are “moral”. Again, I have to disagree.  Local elections aside, most elections are so close as to show a real divide in the way Americans think they should be governed. 

At the very end of the blog, we get to the real point of this post…that this person wants drugs legalized and is blaming the conservatives for its being illegal.    He quotes a verse in Mathew about what goes into a man’s mouth does not defile him, but what comes out does.  First of all, the context of this was food - not drugs. 

I could argue this further by saying that drugs alter a person’s mood - release inhibitions - and as a result, could lead to some defilement of themselves or others…for example….a driver who is high on pot could cause an accident and kill someone else or themselves…is that not to be considered defilement?  Food on the other hand, may make one obese or have a stomach ache but isn’t like to impair ones driving…unless of course, they were searching for the french fry they dropped on the floorboard………

I am a conservative….and I think that pot should legalized…as do many of my conservative friends.  We also don’t believe that the government has a right to tell a restaurant owner that he has to ban smoking….the non smokers can choose another restaurant now can’t they?  But those liberals out there, they want to take away the “choice” of the smoker not to smoke and the restaurant owner not to allow it…..How is that not as bad as those conservatives who don’t want to legalize pot?

I have personal reasons for believing that pot should be legalized - those reasons include the fact that taxing that product could go a long way to helping out the governments deficit……..but the main one is that after using prescribed anti anxiety drugs, a friend of mine had hives and itching and thoughts of suicide increased.  With moderate smoking of pot, my friend was able to handle all the anxiety all by her lonesome………

Anyhoo……..the desire to legislate morality is found on both the liberal and the conservative side of the aisle………

enemyofthestatist:

Conservatism, in word, preaches that freedom and liberty are key tenants of a great nation, but look a little deeper. Conservatism, at it’s philosophical core preaches that the state not only has a place in protecting you from the aggression of others, but to teach to those within its borders, a…

Let me start by agreeing with a lot of what you said. Liberal COULD be switched in and a lot of this would still apply. In fact less than 24 hours later I did just that.

You say most elections are too close to tell anything about the people, but I disagree strongly. I think the closeness of elections says far more about the politicians and just how homogenous a group they are. It’s kind of a given that when asked to chose between apples and apples you will get a 50/50 split between people picking apples and people picking apples, because no real choice is being made, and their answers will likely be little more than a coin flip.

You then go on to say that someone could defile themselves while using drugs. This is true. I’ve seen it done, but is that not their right? Last time I checked the congress has no responsibility to uphold the dignity of its citizens. Then you say there could be the tragic car accident scenario, but this sounds more like a case against driving under the influence which I think we can all agree is bad.

However, to say that this “the real point” of this post was about legalizing drugs is just flat out incorrect. The point of this post was that conservatives feel they have morality figured out better then the rest of the political spectrum, and their drug policy is just a great example of that.

I’m getting pretty sick of people assuming this dislike for one political party means I support the other. It just isn’t as cut and dry as you make whilst attacking me for doing the same thing.

a-petro-manifesto:

>everyone reblogging my Barack Obama photoset

>autismal logic

>”hurr durr it was Bush’s fault”

>”we’re out of Iraq right?”

>”he dun’ good”

>picture related, it’s their collective face

a-petro-manifesto:

Where did all the anti-war liberals go?

Oh wait, that’s right; a “Democrat” is in office so now it’s ok.

Cool

So true.

Political polarity

The two main schools of political thought in this country are full of contradiction. The conservatives trust that people can handle the economy when left to their own devices, but that they would turn into degenerates if left to make their own moral decisions. Liberals seem to think people are money hoarding swine, but can be trusted to make personal decisions. Why is faith in humanity as whole not a more popular school of thought than it is?