The Democratic Party Autopsy Report

Rob Roy · Jan 2, 2018

dagwood45431 said:
Wait. What? You believe a profit motive should be driving criminal justice in the US? Tell me more! LMFAO!

I will expound on this, if you answer the 5 questions I asked you.

I can address your comment, can you answer my questions? I don't think you will, LMFAO!!

twostrokenut · Jan 2, 2018

PCXV said:
Damn right I'm not. I believe in limited rights, fairness, order, and peace. When white racists own those private roads and they declare no blacks can drive on them, then what? Black people can't cross town, to shop, to go to the bank, to see family, and you say that's OK because whites own the land? Your ideals are complete horse shit. Worth even less than horse shit.

By allowing rampant, arbitrary discrimination you are inviting conflict, not preventing it.

roads are open and public because you have a right to travel. is a donut shop open and public because you have a constitutional right to doughnuts?

UncleBuck · Jan 2, 2018

Rob Roy said:
So you would or would not force a black person to serve a white person against the black persons will?

it went the opposite way but you are trying to avoid that fact because you are too much of a weak pussy to admit you're a racist.

UncleBuck · Jan 2, 2018

FootballFirst said:
Good to see Uncle Buck hasn't changed in all these years. Still lashing out with personal insults instead of debating the merits of the argument.

Liberals, they're all the same. They never debate you on the merits of your argument because they can't win. Instead they slander and discredit you while ignoring the actual argument. It's straight out of Rules for Radicals by Saul Alinsky.

The very basis of Liberals' socialistic ideals are not sustainable financially because they run completely counter to basic math and their social ideals run completely counter to how humans have evolved which is by incentive driven behavior. You'd think the natural sciences of math and evolution would guide Liberal thought as they espouse science every chance they get, yet most of their social ideals revolve around making everything equal for everybody which is in direct conflict with the world of science they claim to espouse which is where only the strongest survive and the weak die.

People like Uncle Buck really are conflicted individuals because what they believe doesn't match up with what they claim to espouse. It's no wonder they become angry and lash out when you wave their conundrums in front of their face.

I particularly love seeing Liberals squirm over Trump. They broke all the rules and corrupted everything to put Hillary in the White House and it still didn't work. Their Trump tantrums are adorable.

Liberalism, it's not sustainable.

so then what are the merits of denying service to black people?

make sure to take trump's tiny flaccid dick out of your mouth before answering.

UncleBuck · Jan 2, 2018

Rob Roy said:
can you answer my questions?

din denial of service to black people cause them harm?

UncleBuck · Jan 2, 2018

twostrokenut said:
roads are open and public because you have a right to travel. is a donut shop open and public because you have a constitutional right to doughnuts?

you oppose civil rights because you are a scared, hysterical, weak little racist.

dagwood45431 · Jan 2, 2018

Rob Roy said:
I will expound on this, if you answer the 5 questions I asked you.

I can address your comment, can you answer my questions? I don't think you will, LMFAO!!

Listen, dumdum; I'm saying I've been down this rabbit hole with you way too many times already. It's stupid and tedious and I don't take you seriously enough to give a fuck about your loony theories for how society ought to be structured. Get the fuck off the grid and leave us sensible folk to our machinations. Thanks. You'll be happier too.

FootballFirst · Jan 2, 2018

UncleBuck said:
so then what are the merits of denying service to black people?

make sure to take trump's tiny flaccid dick out of your mouth before answering.

Thanks for proving my point. I knew you wouldn't let me down. Saul would be proud were he here today.

PCXV · Jan 2, 2018

FootballFirst said:
Good to see Uncle Buck hasn't changed in all these years. Still lashing out with personal insults instead of debating the merits of the argument.

Liberals, they're all the same. They never debate you on the merits of your argument because they can't win. Instead they slander and discredit you while ignoring the actual argument. It's straight out of Rules for Radicals by Saul Alinsky.

The very basis of Liberals' socialistic ideals are not sustainable financially because they run completely counter to basic math and their social ideals run completely counter to how humans have evolved which is by incentive driven behavior. You'd think the natural sciences of math and evolution would guide Liberal thought as they espouse science every chance they get, yet most of their social ideals revolve around making everything equal for everybody which is in direct conflict with the world of science they claim to espouse which is where only the strongest survive and the weak die.

People like Uncle Buck really are conflicted individuals because what they believe doesn't match up with what they claim to espouse. It's no wonder they become angry and lash out when you wave their conundrums in front of their face.

I particularly love seeing Liberals squirm over Trump. They broke all the rules and corrupted everything to put Hillary in the White House and it still didn't work. Their Trump tantrums are adorable.

Old hat arguments. The reason liberals support a public sector is exactly because of incentive driven behavior. There is an incentive to collectivize. Science explains why people are innately social beings and why humans historically created thousands of civilizations.

@Rob Roy, here is your reasoning for authority over people's private property by a third party: private property rights are under the larger umbrella of franchise (nation) owned collectively via a democratic republic. The majority of people have a right to decide the laws of this nation, they are the authority. The incentives are obvious and apparent by what has been accomplished under this system. The founding fathers created it that way and did a pretty damn good job. Compromise and checks and balances assure (or at least promote) fairness and peace. A person's private property is no longer completely private once they enter the open market; their property is commercialized, thus serving a different purpose. Your idea that this is rape and theft is incorrect. It would be immorral and unjust for you to force your way into somebodies home, steal from them, rape them, etc. as both you are not rightfully compensating them nor is that property part of an open market and subject to commercial regulations. Are you feigning not understand the nuance? I'm sensing disingenuity.

Fogdog · Jan 2, 2018

FootballFirst said:
Good to see Uncle Buck hasn't changed in all these years. Still lashing out with personal insults instead of debating the merits of the argument.

Liberals, they're all the same. They never debate you on the merits of your argument because they can't win. Instead they slander and discredit you while ignoring the actual argument. It's straight out of Rules for Radicals by Saul Alinsky.

The very basis of Liberals' socialistic ideals are not sustainable financially because they run completely counter to basic math and their social ideals run completely counter to how humans have evolved which is by incentive driven behavior. You'd think the natural sciences of math and evolution would guide Liberal thought as they espouse science every chance they get, yet most of their social ideals revolve around making everything equal for everybody which is in direct conflict with the world of science they claim to espouse which is where only the strongest survive and the weak die.

People like Uncle Buck really are conflicted individuals because what they believe doesn't match up with what they claim to espouse. It's no wonder they become angry and lash out when you wave their conundrums in front of their face.

I particularly love seeing Liberals squirm over Trump. They broke all the rules and corrupted everything to put Hillary in the White House and it still didn't work. Their Trump tantrums are adorable.

Liberalism, it's not sustainable.

Denmark, Sweden, Canada

All have strong economies, good social programs and consistently do well in terms of happiness index and have societies with better social mobility.

Let's just overlook how the Congress recently passed legislation that gave the greatest wealth transfer to the wealthiest ever while borrowing money to do so.

You are very provincial and ignorant of what's really going on in the world.

Your Trump is under investigation for using the services of a dictator of a nation that is hostile to freedom and democracy to discredit our election. I understand that you dislike the values of freeedom and democracy but please stick to facts.

LOL Hillary is not relevant any more and you have so little good that your authoritaryian administration has done that you need to look backward, not forward.

PCXV · Jan 2, 2018

twostrokenut said:
roads are open and public because you have a right to travel. is a donut shop open and public because you have a constitutional right to doughnuts?

Rob Roy Moore disagrees with you that anyone has a right to travel. You have a constitutional right to have your money accepted in the open market within the United States under reasonable and just laws. You do not have a right to stoke racial or other types of social tension and push a bigoted, ignorant, harmful, and unjust ideology in a commercial capacity.

UncleBuck · Jan 2, 2018

FootballFirst said:
Thanks for proving my point. I knew you wouldn't let me down. Saul would be proud were he here today.

why don't you want to debate the merits of denying service to black people?

trump's little dick stuck in your mouth, pussy boy?

twostrokenut · Jan 2, 2018

SneekyNinja said:
Not rights that were recognised, no.

You know that's what he meant, I know that's what he meant and everyone else knows that's what he meant but you decided to be retarded and try to play word games.

yeah not recognized BY LAW but regular people had no major issues with anyone's skin color. what you and bunk seem to forget is that people were forced to segregate against their will at gunpoint, that is, compelled to by law and law enforcement.

that's legislated morality.

then the republicans go and pass civil rights, which is more legislated morality.

the two are opposite sides of the moral spectrum, I will give you that. but legislated morality simply doesn't work. n3ver thought that would need explanation on pot forum.

UncleBuck · Jan 2, 2018

twostrokenut said:
yeah not recognized BY LAW but regular people had no major issues with anyone's skin color. what you and bunk seem to forget is that people were forced to segregate against their will at gunpoint, that is, compelled to by law and law enforcement.

that's legislated morality.

then the republicans go and pass civil rights, which is more legislated morality.

the two are opposite sides of the moral spectrum, I will give you that. but legislated morality simply doesn't work. n3ver thought that would need explanation on pot forum.

literally none of that was correct.

people had major issues with race to the point of denying black people service in ways that were not explained by jim crow laws. civil rights were voted into law by northern democrats and republicans with zero support from the south, then signed into law by a democrat.

you deal only in fiction, lies, and history denial. you are a holocaust denier.

twostrokenut · Jan 2, 2018

dagwood45431 said:
So, fire departments are "warfare" or "welfare"? Derp.

I'm talking about all of it, dumdum.

without a credit card. I know that might cramp your little teenage girl at the mall type fun though sista. still got your cell with data though and dont forget that "all of it" mostly means war anymore.

your fire dept is local for the most part. so figure it out locally.

UncleBuck · Jan 2, 2018

twostrokenut said:
without a credit card. I know that might cramp your little teenage girl at the mall type fun though sista. still got your cell with data though and dont forget that "all of it" mostly means war anymore.

your fire dept is local for the most part. so figure it out locally.

without a credit card we'd have had no funding to fight the nazis.

but that would only make you happy, little anime nazi cosplay princess.

twostrokenut · Jan 2, 2018

UncleBuck said:
southern democrats and republicans opposed civil rights. northern democrats and republicans voted for it.

and your home state turned ruby red once a democrat signed civil rights into law.

sucks that you can't just rewrite history with your neo-confederate revisionism, eh?

cuck shill

there were no southern republicans in office and your home state of New Jersey was just as red. actually the whole country went red at that point.

so your theory is that the ENTIRE country turned racist after civil rights, which is an epically stupid position to hold.

everyone voted pub because they just passed civil rights and had a lame new economic message to go along with booming new industrial expansion and relocation.

twostrokenut · Jan 2, 2018

PCXV said:
A southern white conservative principle that many still hold today, they are known as Republicans. You fool nobody.

conservative principles today are conservatory to the principles that founded the country. all being created equal in rights and the war fought to settle that included with no taxation without representation and a small but well funded limited government.

those same racists shithead governors voted for fdr, just like you would have done in lockstep.

you are trying to draw some non existent lines like Glenn beck on a chalkboard.

UncleBuck · Jan 2, 2018

twostrokenut said:
there were no southern republicans in office and your home state of New Jersey was just as red. actually the whole country went red at that point.

View attachment 4067171
View attachment 4067172

so your theory is that the ENTIRE country turned racist after civil rights, which is an epically stupid position to hold.

everyone voted pub because they just passed civil rights and had a lame new economic message to go along with booming new industrial expansion and relocation.

does it hurt you that history is nothing like the revisionist tale you've told in your head?

how the actual vote for civil rights went down:

northerners voted civil rights into law. it was signed into law by a democrat.

the south, which had voted republican for decades, has now voted exclusively for republicans (and segregationists) ever since. nearly all of the senate seats in the south used to be democrat held, now they are nearly all republican held.

must suck so bad to be a poverty ridden racist piece of trailer trash.

UncleBuck · Jan 2, 2018

twostrokenut said:
conservative principles today are conservatory to the principles that founded the country. all being created equal in rights and the war fought to settle that included with no taxation without representation and a small but well funded limited government.

those same racists shithead governors voted for fdr, just like you would have done in lockstep.

you are trying to draw some non existent lines like Glenn beck on a chalkboard.

if conservatism is about equal rights, why are conservatives opposed to marriage equality, transgender soldiers serving in the military, the equal rights amendment (LOL), the lily ledbetter fair pay act, the voting rights act, and more?

hell, if "conservatives" like you are for equality, why do you claim that freedom of religion means muslim people can;t build mosques, bigot?

The Democratic Party Autopsy Report

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member