(12-24-2021, 01:17 PM)P1tchblack Wrote:

(12-24-2021, 12:29 PM)Hightop77 Wrote:

(12-24-2021, 12:27 PM)P1tchblack Wrote:

(12-24-2021, 12:23 PM)Hightop77 Wrote:

(12-24-2021, 12:21 PM)P1tchblack Wrote: Socialism has been turned into all of those things, and more, but they don't meet the definition.  They are exames of wealth redistribution, which is different from socialism.

Wealth redistribution is a key component of socialism.

 Socialism, as YOU pointed out in your Maxine Waters example, is the government owning the means of production, ie taking over the oil industry from drilling to distribution.

You cannot just separate the components the way you want.  When government can take your wealth and give it away to others in the form of cash, health care, retirement, disability, food stamps and housing while stringently regulating business activity it's still basically socialism.

You can and should separate them, because they are VERY different.  Also, I bet there isn't one Republican congressman that doesn't support some firm of wealth redistribution, so it comes down to the level.

Not really the point.  It is Democrats who elevated welfare and turned wealth redistribution into a way to build a massive voter base of parasites.  That is far different than some GOP support for some forms of welfare handouts.  You can deny it all you want but it won't change what we are doing now which is the road to socialism and it doesn't just have one carefully defined destination.

(12-24-2021, 01:27 PM)Hightop77 Wrote:

(12-24-2021, 01:17 PM)P1tchblack Wrote:

(12-24-2021, 12:29 PM)Hightop77 Wrote:

(12-24-2021, 12:27 PM)P1tchblack Wrote:

(12-24-2021, 12:23 PM)Hightop77 Wrote: Wealth redistribution is a key component of socialism.

 Socialism, as YOU pointed out in your Maxine Waters example, is the government owning the means of production, ie taking over the oil industry from drilling to distribution.

You cannot just separate the components the way you want.  When government can take your wealth and give it away to others in the form of cash, health care, retirement, disability, food stamps and housing while stringently regulating business activity it's still basically socialism.

You can and should separate them, because they are VERY different.  Also, I bet there isn't one Republican congressman that doesn't support some firm of wealth redistribution, so it comes down to the level.

Not really the point.  It is Democrats who elevated welfare and turned wealth redistribution into a way to build a massive voter base of parasites.  That is far different than some GOP support for some forms of welfare handouts.  You can deny it all you want but it won't change what we are doing now which is the road to socialism and it doesn't just have one carefully defined destination.

Again, I bet every congressman supports redistribution of wealth and virtually none support true socialism, aka government ownership of production means

(12-24-2021, 01:34 PM)P1tchblack Wrote:

(12-24-2021, 01:27 PM)Hightop77 Wrote:

(12-24-2021, 01:17 PM)P1tchblack Wrote:

(12-24-2021, 12:29 PM)Hightop77 Wrote:

(12-24-2021, 12:27 PM)P1tchblack Wrote:  Socialism, as YOU pointed out in your Maxine Waters example, is the government owning the means of production, ie taking over the oil industry from drilling to distribution.

You cannot just separate the components the way you want.  When government can take your wealth and give it away to others in the form of cash, health care, retirement, disability, food stamps and housing while stringently regulating business activity it's still basically socialism.

You can and should separate them, because they are VERY different.  Also, I bet there isn't one Republican congressman that doesn't support some firm of wealth redistribution, so it comes down to the level.

Not really the point.  It is Democrats who elevated welfare and turned wealth redistribution into a way to build a massive voter base of parasites.  That is far different than some GOP support for some forms of welfare handouts.  You can deny it all you want but it won't change what we are doing now which is the road to socialism and it doesn't just have one carefully defined destination.

Again, I bet every congressman supports redistribution of wealth and virtually none support true socialism, aka government ownership of production means

There are plenty of Democrats now who would vote for a socialist state as long as they were in charge of it.

(12-24-2021, 01:42 PM)Hightop77 Wrote:

(12-24-2021, 01:34 PM)P1tchblack Wrote:

(12-24-2021, 01:27 PM)Hightop77 Wrote:

(12-24-2021, 01:17 PM)P1tchblack Wrote:

(12-24-2021, 12:29 PM)Hightop77 Wrote: You cannot just separate the components the way you want.  When government can take your wealth and give it away to others in the form of cash, health care, retirement, disability, food stamps and housing while stringently regulating business activity it's still basically socialism.

You can and should separate them, because they are VERY different.  Also, I bet there isn't one Republican congressman that doesn't support some firm of wealth redistribution, so it comes down to the level.

Not really the point.  It is Democrats who elevated welfare and turned wealth redistribution into a way to build a massive voter base of parasites.  That is far different than some GOP support for some forms of welfare handouts.  You can deny it all you want but it won't change what we are doing now which is the road to socialism and it doesn't just have one carefully defined destination.

Again, I bet every congressman supports redistribution of wealth and virtually none support true socialism, aka government ownership of production means

There are plenty of Democrats now who would vote for a socialist state as long as they were in charge of it.

Your unsupported hyperbole is beside the point.

(12-24-2021, 01:51 PM)P1tchblack Wrote:

(12-24-2021, 01:42 PM)Hightop77 Wrote:

(12-24-2021, 01:34 PM)P1tchblack Wrote:

(12-24-2021, 01:27 PM)Hightop77 Wrote:

(12-24-2021, 01:17 PM)P1tchblack Wrote: You can and should separate them, because they are VERY different.  Also, I bet there isn't one Republican congressman that doesn't support some firm of wealth redistribution, so it comes down to the level.

Not really the point.  It is Democrats who elevated welfare and turned wealth redistribution into a way to build a massive voter base of parasites.  That is far different than some GOP support for some forms of welfare handouts.  You can deny it all you want but it won't change what we are doing now which is the road to socialism and it doesn't just have one carefully defined destination.

Again, I bet every congressman supports redistribution of wealth and virtually none support true socialism, aka government ownership of production means

There are plenty of Democrats now who would vote for a socialist state as long as they were in charge of it.

Your unsupported hyperbole is beside the point.

And your refusal to see what these people are actually doing and attempting to do and instead falling for the media spin and propaganda is sad.

(12-24-2021, 01:57 PM)Hightop77 Wrote:

(12-24-2021, 01:51 PM)P1tchblack Wrote:

(12-24-2021, 01:42 PM)Hightop77 Wrote:

(12-24-2021, 01:34 PM)P1tchblack Wrote:

(12-24-2021, 01:27 PM)Hightop77 Wrote: Not really the point.  It is Democrats who elevated welfare and turned wealth redistribution into a way to build a massive voter base of parasites.  That is far different than some GOP support for some forms of welfare handouts.  You can deny it all you want but it won't change what we are doing now which is the road to socialism and it doesn't just have one carefully defined destination.

Again, I bet every congressman supports redistribution of wealth and virtually none support true socialism, aka government ownership of production means

There are plenty of Democrats now who would vote for a socialist state as long as they were in charge of it.

Your unsupported hyperbole is beside the point.

And your refusal to see what these people are actually doing and attempting to do and instead falling for the media spin and propaganda is sad.

Then tell me all the congressmen that have expressed support for ACTUAL socialism, not "Tucker's"faux  socialism.

(12-24-2021, 01:59 PM)P1tchblack Wrote:

(12-24-2021, 01:57 PM)Hightop77 Wrote:

(12-24-2021, 01:51 PM)P1tchblack Wrote:

(12-24-2021, 01:42 PM)Hightop77 Wrote:

(12-24-2021, 01:34 PM)P1tchblack Wrote: Again, I bet every congressman supports redistribution of wealth and virtually none support true socialism, aka government ownership of production means

There are plenty of Democrats now who would vote for a socialist state as long as they were in charge of it.

Your unsupported hyperbole is beside the point.

And your refusal to see what these people are actually doing and attempting to do and instead falling for the media spin and propaganda is sad.

Then tell me all the congressmen that have expressed support for ACTUAL socialism, not "Tucker's"faux  socialism.

They are much like you.  They would not use the word socialism except to twist it and lie about it such as when they say things like socialism works so well in Norway and Sweden even though those countries are not at all socialist.  Few would actually express their public support for socialism though.  However when groups in Congress like the Congressional Black Caucus visited Cuba and came home praising Castro it should tell you a lot.  Unfortunately you are not capable of really understanding.

(12-24-2021, 02:09 PM)Hightop77 Wrote:

(12-24-2021, 01:59 PM)P1tchblack Wrote:

(12-24-2021, 01:57 PM)Hightop77 Wrote:

(12-24-2021, 01:51 PM)P1tchblack Wrote:

(12-24-2021, 01:42 PM)Hightop77 Wrote: There are plenty of Democrats now who would vote for a socialist state as long as they were in charge of it.

Your unsupported hyperbole is beside the point.

And your refusal to see what these people are actually doing and attempting to do and instead falling for the media spin and propaganda is sad.

Then tell me all the congressmen that have expressed support for ACTUAL socialism, not "Tucker's"faux  socialism.

They are much like you.  They would not use the word socialism except to twist it and lie about it such as when they say things like socialism works so well in Norway and Sweden even though those countries are not at all socialist.  Few would actually express their public support for socialism though.  However when groups in Congress like the Congressional Black Caucus visited Cuba and came home praising Castro it should tell you a lot.  Unfortunately you are not capable of really understanding.

So  you've got nothing. 

At least show me the last bill/proposal that was an attempt to implement some kind of actual socialism.

(12-24-2021, 02:25 PM)P1tchblack Wrote:

(12-24-2021, 02:09 PM)Hightop77 Wrote:

(12-24-2021, 01:59 PM)P1tchblack Wrote:

(12-24-2021, 01:57 PM)Hightop77 Wrote:

(12-24-2021, 01:51 PM)P1tchblack Wrote: Your unsupported hyperbole is beside the point.

And your refusal to see what these people are actually doing and attempting to do and instead falling for the media spin and propaganda is sad.

Then tell me all the congressmen that have expressed support for ACTUAL socialism, not "Tucker's"faux  socialism.

They are much like you.  They would not use the word socialism except to twist it and lie about it such as when they say things like socialism works so well in Norway and Sweden even though those countries are not at all socialist.  Few would actually express their public support for socialism though.  However when groups in Congress like the Congressional Black Caucus visited Cuba and came home praising Castro it should tell you a lot.  Unfortunately you are not capable of really understanding.

So  you've got nothing. 

At least show me the last bill/proposal that was an attempt to implement some kind of actual socialism.

In terms of the large spending bills and the one trying to federalize elections, you might find it easier to show Democrat legislation that isn't designed to move us toward socialism.

(12-24-2021, 02:29 PM)Hightop77 Wrote:

(12-24-2021, 02:25 PM)P1tchblack Wrote:

(12-24-2021, 02:09 PM)Hightop77 Wrote:

(12-24-2021, 01:59 PM)P1tchblack Wrote:

(12-24-2021, 01:57 PM)Hightop77 Wrote: And your refusal to see what these people are actually doing and attempting to do and instead falling for the media spin and propaganda is sad.

Then tell me all the congressmen that have expressed support for ACTUAL socialism, not "Tucker's"faux  socialism.

They are much like you.  They would not use the word socialism except to twist it and lie about it such as when they say things like socialism works so well in Norway and Sweden even though those countries are not at all socialist.  Few would actually express their public support for socialism though.  However when groups in Congress like the Congressional Black Caucus visited Cuba and came home praising Castro it should tell you a lot.  Unfortunately you are not capable of really understanding.

So  you've got nothing. 

At least show me the last bill/proposal that was an attempt to implement some kind of actual socialism.

In terms of the large spending bills and the one trying to federalize elections, you might find it easier to show Democrat legislation that isn't designed to move us toward socialism.

So, again, nothing because redistribution of wealth is NOT socialism.

Arbitrator sides with sheriff, upholds firing of BCSO lieutenant who was at deadly Capitol riot
Lt. Roxanne Mathai, 47, called protest outside US Capitol building one of the best days of her life

SAN ANTONIO – An arbitrator has upheld the termination of a Bexar County Sheriffâ€s Office lieutenant, nearly a year after she posted multiple photographs on Facebook showing her near the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6 as a protest erupted into a deadly riot, agency officials confirmed to the KSAT 12 Defenders.

Lt. Roxanne Mathai, 47, was given an order of dismissal in June, five months after Sheriff Javier Salazar said he intended to never have Mathai set foot in a BCSO building again.

Mathai appealed Salazarâ€s decision, then later argued before an arbitrator that she was simply present for a historic event, agency officials said.

“I just thought it was the most ridiculous thing Iâ€d ever heard. Itâ€s not like youâ€re standing there for the signing of the Declaration of Independence. Thatâ€s a historic event. Youâ€re there when fellow Americans lost their lives. Thatâ€s nothing to be proud of,” Salazar said during an interview with KSAT Monday evening.

https://www.ksat.com/news/local/2021/12/...itol-riot/

Sounds like an inappropriate firing to me

(12-28-2021, 12:20 PM)Alabuckeye Wrote: Sounds like an inappropriate firing to me

Sounds like she was there but not participating. If she didn't do anything illegal then the firing would be inappropriate. Political speech on her own time.

(12-28-2021, 12:20 PM)Alabuckeye Wrote: Sounds like an inappropriate firing to me

Agree

Joe rogan discusses the fbi agent provocation in the jan 6th event of a violent guy instigating violence who intentionally did this to fire up the crowd.

Yet he's never been charged with a crime.




Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk