Gunnar wrote:So we should make no attempt to fight against, expose or punish corruption and fraud because sufficiently evil and determined bad guys will try to get away with it anyway no matter what we do? Is that what subby is saying or implying?
You’re asking the guy who thought that both the last President and Democratic Presidential candidate needed to be investigated for virtually every crazy conspiracy theory coughed up by the Right, including running a child sex ring out of a pizza parlor’s basement - but now he believes the current President is incapable of corruption or wrongdoing in any form or at any level.
You’re not dealing with someone who has any consistency of thought or rudimentary comprehension of logic.
EA wrote:What if people use corruption for good is what you are asking? How ever will be respond to this devastating rhetorical question?
Point being, that as usual Libs/Democrats blme others instea of recognizing personal accountability. The system does not create "the bad guy" it simply allows for it - which is the condition of every free society, of liberty. In order for good to flourish there must be vulnerability. In other words, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's "bad guy" would still find a way regardless. She is using emotional rhetoric which is great for politics but lousy for policy. So, to condemn the system because of her "bad guy" movie pitch is to also condemn the freedom and ability of the good guys out there...and fortunately there are still more of them than not. But please, continue your campaign of fear mongering that has been tediously promoted for a little over 24 months now....
You claim that the flaw in the presentation's targeting of vehicles of corruption is it somehow or other constrains so-called good guys from using these vehicles of corruption to do so-called good things? And having laws or just ethical standards that constrain people from behaving in a corrupt manner is blaming others rather than enforcing accountability? Rather than establishing the, what's it called again? Rule of law something something?
Huh. "Conservatives". At least subbie is openly acknowledging that "law and order" is code among conservatives for their way or the highway on the one hand, while the ends justify the means on the other.
The world is always full of the sound of waves..but who knows the heart of the sea, a hundred feet down? Who knows it's depth? ~ Eiji Yoshikawa
honorentheos wrote:Huh. "Conservatives". At least subbie is openly acknowledging that "law and order" is code among conservatives for their way or the highway on the one hand, while the ends justify the means on the other.
subs has a special talent for describing all of his guiding principles in the most morally repugnant way.
honorentheos wrote:Huh. "Conservatives". At least subbie is openly acknowledging that "law and order" is code among conservatives for their way or the highway on the one hand, while the ends justify the means on the other.
subs has a special talent for describing all of his guiding principles in the most morally repugnant way.
Suddenly you have morals? and i have talent!
Seek freedom and become captive of your desires...seek discipline and find your liberty I can tell if a person is judgmental just by looking at them what is chaos to the fly is normal to the spider - morticia addams If you're not upsetting idiots, you might be an idiot. - Ted Nugent
honorentheos wrote:You claim that the flaw in the presentation's targeting of vehicles of corruption is it somehow or other constrains so-called good guys from using these vehicles of corruption to do so-called good things? And having laws or just ethical standards that constrain people from behaving in a corrupt manner is blaming others rather than enforcing accountability? Rather than establishing the, what's it called again? Rule of law something something?
Huh. "Conservatives". At least subbie is openly acknowledging that "law and order" is code among conservatives for their way or the highway on the one hand, while the ends justify the means on the other.
Nope. don't know why you guys always feel a need to re-phrase and re-season a clearly stated point, but meh. My point is that freedom and liberty are vulnerable to exploitation and this vulnerability does not justify their elimination. Furthermore, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez presents a one sided and hypothetical and exploitative argument that reinforces fear and frustration with her base...a strategy you apparently support when convenient to party allegiance.
Seek freedom and become captive of your desires...seek discipline and find your liberty I can tell if a person is judgmental just by looking at them what is chaos to the fly is normal to the spider - morticia addams If you're not upsetting idiots, you might be an idiot. - Ted Nugent
honorentheos wrote:You claim that the flaw in the presentation's targeting of vehicles of corruption is it somehow or other constrains so-called good guys from using these vehicles of corruption to do so-called good things? And having laws or just ethical standards that constrain people from behaving in a corrupt manner is blaming others rather than enforcing accountability? Rather than establishing the, what's it called again? Rule of law something something?
Huh. "Conservatives". At least subbie is openly acknowledging that "law and order" is code among conservatives for their way or the highway on the one hand, while the ends justify the means on the other.
Nope. don't know why you guys always feel a need to re-phrase and re-season a clearly stated point, but meh. My point is that freedom and liberty are vulnerable to exploitation and this vulnerability does not justify their elimination. Furthermore, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez presents a one sided and hypothetical and exploitative argument that reinforces fear and frustration with her base...a strategy you apparently support when convenient to party allegiance.
You confuse ‘freedom and liberty’ with the actions committed in its name. Other posters are not experiencing your handicap.
honorentheos wrote:You claim that the flaw in the presentation's targeting of vehicles of corruption is it somehow or other constrains so-called good guys from using these vehicles of corruption to do so-called good things? And having laws or just ethical standards that constrain people from behaving in a corrupt manner is blaming others rather than enforcing accountability? Rather than establishing the, what's it called again? Rule of law something something?
Huh. "Conservatives". At least subbie is openly acknowledging that "law and order" is code among conservatives for their way or the highway on the one hand, while the ends justify the means on the other.
Nope. don't know why you guys always feel a need to re-phrase and re-season a clearly stated point, but meh. My point is that freedom and liberty are vulnerable to exploitation and this vulnerability does not justify their elimination. Furthermore, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez presents a one sided and hypothetical and exploitative argument that reinforces fear and frustration with her base...a strategy you apparently support when convenient to party allegiance.
Your argument is one for protecting so-called freedom to behave in an unethical manner with no specific argument as to what is actually at risk If the US were to remodel it's representative democracy so that the representatives are more beholden to the people instead of the special interests who fund their campaigns and line their pockets. Your argument is to bellow out "Freeeeddddooooom!" and assume nothing else need be said.
Again. "Conservatives."
Last edited by Guest on Tue Feb 12, 2019 1:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.
The world is always full of the sound of waves..but who knows the heart of the sea, a hundred feet down? Who knows it's depth? ~ Eiji Yoshikawa
honorentheos wrote:Your argument is one for protecting so-called freedom to behave in an unethical manner with no specific argument as to what is actually at risk of the US were to remodel it's representative democracy so that the representatives are more beholden to the people instead of the special interests who fund their campaigns and line their pockets. Your argument is to bellow out "Freeeeddddooooom!" and assume nothing else need be said.
Again. "Conservatives."
Meanwhile, “Seek freedom and become captive of your desires...”, said the subject’s signature.
subgenius wrote:My point is that freedom and liberty are vulnerable to exploitation and this vulnerability does not justify their elimination.
Can I interest you in the US Constitution? You should really read it - it could change your life!
In that document you will find that the Founding Fathers, who were of course writing at the dictation of Jesus Christ™, made provision for the Legislature to have the power to make weird things called 'laws'. Many of these 'laws' are, you will find, expressly designed to eliminate the freedom to do certain things. On the whole, the Legislature makes 'laws' when it thinks that the harm done to others by some individuals exploiting their freedom and liberty is great enough to justify eliminating that freedom.
Who'da thunk it? You learn something new every day on this board.
Zadok: I did not have a faith crisis. I discovered that the Church was having a truth crisis. Maksutov: That's the problem with this supernatural stuff, it doesn't really solve anything. It's a placeholder for ignorance.