Obama as a "Socialist"

[ASPCA4EVER]

Sometimes things get heated and people get carried away saying things that verge on being personal attacks. Other times things actually are personal attacks.

It seem to me that in the last few days your posted vitriol (nothing about you but a comment on your posts) has been upped a notch. And I would say that calling a member who not even a part of this conversation eliminates the excuse that you just got carried away.

Mods what do you say?

Maybe you need to step back, retrace and start reading some of the posts that brought this topic to this POINT prior to your inserting your 2¢ worth into this when you really don't have a clue but your nose just seems to lead you right into the deepest part of the manure pile!

This coming from the person that takes my neighbors health example and turns into a personal insult...YA, you should be asking the Mod just how they feel about a post.

JEEZ LOUISE, you are a classic whiner...and really good at it too!!!

 

[GenSeneca]

What foolishness.

Most of what you post is.

The only significant "copying and pasting" in my last response was in reply to your claim about the incompatibility of classical liberalism and socialism.

They are incompatible. I proved that by providing definitions, you offered assertions backed by nothing of substance.

I elaborated on the conflicts between classical liberalism and capitalism

You made assertions backed by nothing of substance.

then explained why republican market socialism was more compatible with classical liberalism than capitalism.

You made assertions backed by nothing of substance.

If you didn't regurgitate the standard rightist drivel, you just might earn yourself a more original reply some day, but at this point, you won't.

Make any excuse you like to cover for your dishonesty and intellectual laziness.

The fact that you are unable to reply to even a single comment in my response is evidence of your clear loss here.

Declaring victory is a sign of your frantic need to avoid further confrontation.

 

[GenSeneca]

Mods what do you say?

We will soon find out.

 

[pocketfullofshells]

Declaring victory is a sign of your frantic need to avoid further confrontation.

to easy lol had to

 

[GenSeneca]

to easy lol had to

Excellent example!

 

[Pandora]

to easy lol had to

You found that picture dang fast


It is a good example.

 

[pocketfullofshells]

You found that picture dang fast


It is a good example.

us libs keep it on a hot key lol jk

 

[Pandora]

us libs keep it on a hot key lol jk

I supose thats the one to keep if you got to keep one

 

[GenSeneca]

us libs keep it on a hot key lol jk

Do you have "Bush lied people died" on a macro?

 

[pocketfullofshells]

Do you have "Bush lied people died" on a macro?

I should, but no. think is I am always torn , did he lie, or was he just that bad at his job he belived what he said...and others lied to him.....

Evil mastermind

or guy with no clue stuck way over his head becuse of his last name

I still don't know...to be fair I just think he was clueless...it was others who lied...I am sure when he was up there talking about yellowcake documents from Niger ( already known to be fake ( even by me at the time) he realy belived it was true....but there was those under who knew it to be wrong and did not care....Dick.....

 

[Agnapostate]

Most of what you post is.

That's the kind of wit that tends to blow one away.

They are incompatible.

I offered a lengthy explanation of why classical liberalism and capitalism are incompatible, as opposed to classical liberalism and socialism. You screeched that I had posted the explanation elsewhere, and that it consequently "didn't count." Your faults are not mine.

I proved that by providing definitions, you offered assertions backed by nothing of substance.

You made assertions backed by nothing of substance.

You made assertions backed by nothing of substance.

Kids, don't ever copy and paste, mmkay?!

Make any excuse you like to cover for your dishonesty and intellectual laziness.

Dishonesty? I freely acknowledge copying and pasting previous replies of my own writing to fools who regurgitate the same talking points that I hear everywhere else. You should try to be more innovative in the future.

Declaring victory is a sign of your frantic need to avoid further confrontation.

LOL! Projection? You've desperately seized this "copy and paste" whine to avoid addressing the vast majority of my comments on your incoherent post, which weren't copied and pasted.

 

[PLC1]

You are ok with having sex with children?

Incase you did not know, there is a thread started by him
advocating sex with children. Its an old thread but that is what Gen is talking about.

Really? and it wasn't deleted? Can you give us a link?

 

[Agnapostate]

There is no such thread. She's referring to this, which I started at the behest of a now banned poster. I've not advocated "sex with children," which Pandora is aware of.

I advocated the elimination of all age restrictions because of my belief that they functioned as a poor means of measuring competence and ultimately inhibited development. I included the age of consent in this parcel, but placed little focus on it compared to more important issues. If it's against the rules to advocate unpopular viewpoints on this forum, I'll be happy to leave.

 

[ASPCA4EVER]

There is no such thread. She's referring to this, which I started at the behest of a now banned poster. I've not advocated "sex with children," which Pendeja is aware of.

I advocated the elimination of all age restrictions because of my belief that they functioned as a poor means of measuring competence and ultimately inhibited development. I included the age of consent in this parcel, but placed little focus on it compared to more important issues. If it's against the rules to advocate unpopular viewpoints on this forum, I'll be happy to leave.

Oh, no, no, no...don't let those mental midgets railroad you off of this forum...PLC1 is just getting to the seth-pool bottom of a post that was reported by one of those 2 that caused my post to be pulled.

Someone is actually doing some checking up on the 'GOODY 2 SHOES' to see what ignites the smear & slime that's been taking place on this topic!

 

[Pandora]

Really? and it wasn't deleted? Can you give us a link?

look at posts 25 and 27

The first question I asked him was about a man and a 7 year old girl, he compared having sex with a kid to slave labor, as though the trading sex for a bike is what was wrong not the sex.

So I then asked him if he thought sex with an infant was off limits since he wanted no age limits. the conversation goes on from there.







#25
Re: The Age of Consent

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Agnapostate
If a man attempted to have sex with a six month old child, that would physically harm them, and physically harming six month old children is morally unacceptable.

you did not have a problem when it was a 7 year old, do you not realize that it will harm a 7 year old also.

at what point do you think it is ok for a grown man to have sex with a child, at what age ?

and since your issue is that it would physically hurt the child, what about other types of molestation to the child that is not physical penetration. are you ok with doing this to a 6 month old?



#27
Re: The Age of Consent

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote:
Originally Posted by NO Obamanation
you did not have a problem when it was a 7 year old, do you not realize that it will harm a 7 year old also.

at what point do you think it is ok for a grown man to have sex with a child, at what age ?

and since your issue is that it would physically hurt the child, what about other types of molestation to the child that is not physical penetration. are you ok with doing this to a 6 month old?

Neither penetration nor most other types of sexual behavior would typically induce physical harm upon a 7 year old.

My objection to a man attempting to have sexual intercourse with an infant is that such an act could cause severe physical trauma to an infant. The other instances of sexual interaction that you are presumably referring to are wrong inasmuch as they cause the infant to suffer. Suffering is a core issue in the consideration of every single being, be it human or otherwise.




Now I was really glad to hear he had objections to having sex with an infant, I wish he has some objections to having sex with a 7 year old too.