A sociopath isnt interested in everyone having access to health care and would lie to make sure it doesnt happen, a sociopath would implement policies to allow the money to shift to the richest few, a sociopath would lie and manipulate in order to invade other countries, a sociopath would lock sick people in a cage because of a plant, and a sociopath would steal elections.
No, you see the problem with your statement is that the system you are pushing has the view that it is morally justifiable for the government to steal from those that produce to give to those that do not. This is not the position of a person that had ethics, or morals, it is the position of a sociopath, or a person with psychological disorders that can not understand the social contract implicitly signed by those that choose to partake in a society. Namely that the governing body of that society will respect the common laws created through custom by that society.
In the United States these laws include a right to one's own production, and the right to expect that law enforcement will not be used by the government to confiscate your wealth to distribute to other people. In exchange for this guarantee, people form societies.
When this guarantee is broken those that are at a disadvantage will choose to leave the society in search of another where the contract is not being violated by the governing body.
In short, the left consists of a bunch of psychotic self-centered egotistical fucks that are too lazy to get off their asses and provide for themselves, but insist that others should provide for them. Whereas, if some one tried to rob me in person, I'd have the option of killing them, the left insists on committing its crimes through the organ of a state. Insisting that the state can be empowered with the ability to do things that individuals could not do on their own. Namely, stealing from others.
Arguing that I'm a sociopath doesn't work. I don't remember signing any kind of agreement with this society stating that I would agree to allow it to tax me to death, or that I wanted it to tax others to death to provide me with services that I could not provide myself with. I certainly do not think that the government should be empowered to commit crimes, like use of excessive force, compulsion, coercion, blackmail, theft, embezzlement, and murder, because I do not have the power to do the same.
When it comes to punishing crimes through the taking of property to make restitution, or through taking the life of a murderer, then there is no such conflict. In general, society (except for nut jobs on the extreme left) agree that murderers should be executed, and thieves forced to provide restitution to their victims, and be jailed for a period of time as punishment for their acts.
There is also the fact that society is intended to apply the laws created by its collective agreement equally with out bias, favor, or discrimination. Another concept that escapes the microscopic minds of the left. It is not proper to call the United States a society when it is willing to apply the laws differently depending on arbitrary differences in economic status. In the case of the rich that commit crimes (Ted Kennedy, Murder, OJ Simpson, Murder) it is possible for them to hire lawyers to escape just punishment despite evidence that they were guilty of that crime.
The largest problem with society is the existence of government. In a free market services such as the fire department would be either shared by everyone - That is, the town or community would make it a requirement that people volunteer to serve with the fire department for a period of time as a condition of living there - or provided by private firms. Such as detective agencies (Pinkerton, Anti-Horse Theft Association, etc. to mention a couple examples from the Not so Wild, Wild West.) or other companies (Wackenhut, Blackwater, etc.) Such security would (and is) typically provided by landlords in the case of apartment complexes, and secured by businesses to protect their own property, because the police departments are not capable of actually preventing crime, and exist only to provide an alternative to the expedient of killing any criminals that are caught on the spot to avoid having to waste time and money on subsidizing their existence.
Addressing this statement.
a sociopath would lock sick people in a cage because of a plant
There's plenty of people on the left that view drugs as an issue that should result in jail time. In fact the laws against Marijuana were signed into being by FDR.
As far as such people being sociopaths. No, they are just busybodies, much like other leftists, that think that they know what is best for everyone, and thus insist on intruding on everyone's business.
Though if that is a way to judge people as being Sociopaths, then does that mean that all the anti-smoking people on the left that target tobacco usage are sociopaths?
Addressing your next statement:
a sociopath would lie and manipulate in order to invade other countries
There has yet any demonstration that there were lies told. We went in due to the fact that Saddam Hussein was refusing us full access to facilities, and in general acting like he had something to hide. There was also a British Intelligence Report that lead Bush to believe that Iraq did in fact of Weapons of Mass Destruction. It was not a lie, but the result of faulty intelligence. There is a large difference between the two. A lie is intended, acting on faulty information is different, because it's usually not the intent of people to have faulty information.
Though there was no "new" invasion of Iraq under George Bush, just the expanding of hostilities in a region that the United States was being forced to police, and had been forced to police from 1991 with the ceasefire that "ended" the original Gulf War. In short, there was no Gulf War II, it was just another portion of the original Gulf War marked by the return of land forces to Iraq to finally create a lasting peace.
But, if we are going to judge sociopaths as people who lie. Then perhaps you'd care to look at Obama, who said that we would have been out of Iraq by 2010, and just announced that we are going to have
50,000 soldiers remaining there even after we "Withdraw."
a sociopath would implement policies to allow the money to shift to the richest few
You mean much like Obama is doin gwith the continue bail outs of AIG, and CitiGroup? Like he chose to do when he voted for the First Bank Bail Out? Like he has chosen to do with the latest fake stimulus package that only guarantees continued government jobs?
Once again your descriptions of a sociopath allow themselves to be turned against you. Perhaps you should stop trying to engage in debates involving rhetoric and just resume name calling. It is clear that the nuances of rhetoric, and its effective use escape your immature mind.
