The Only Patriotic Choice for President

[Deluge]

2 minutes ago, SkyHigh said:

Again I agree you nimrod 

Problem is the Democrats are none of those things and by going off half cocked (because you're impotent) about nonsense, you're not addressing the actual problems with their actual policies and platform

Now of course this is mainly because you're not at all a logically thinking, reasonable minded person. You are someone that wouldn't be able to put together a sound argument for anything even if It slapped you in the face then I wrote it down for you. You're just sad 

 

My god, you are stupid. You are roboshill level stupid. 

You actually think the "Democratic Party" is a legitimate part of this government just because they carry that f*cking title. LOL! 

Yes, they refer to themselves as the "Democratic Party" but they are not a legitimate branch of this government - NOT ANYMORE. The "Democratic Party" has devolved into the democrat party. There's nothing democratic about today's democrat party, at least not democratic in the Constitutional Republic sense.

No, this party of perverts is now communism/marxism in waiting. It's a group of anti-American a$$holes maintaining multiple issues with our laws and our constitution. There is no way in hell you can defend these a$$holes - not today, and not anytime moving forward. It's a cancer, and that's it. 

[Michael Hardner]

19 minutes ago, SkyHigh said:

Again I agree you nimrod 

 

If you're engaging with someone you have no respect for, You really are wasting your time.

[SkyHigh]

28 minutes ago, Deluge said:

My god, you are stupid. You are roboshill level stupid. 

You actually think the "Democratic Party" is a legitimate part of this government just because they carry that f*cking title. LOL! 

Yes, they refer to themselves as the "Democratic Party" but they are not a legitimate branch of this government - NOT ANYMORE. The "Democratic Party" has devolved into the democrat party. There's nothing democratic about today's democrat party, at least not democratic in the Constitutional Republic sense.

No, this party of perverts is now communism/marxism in waiting. It's a group of anti-American a$$holes maintaining multiple issues with our laws and our constitution. There is no way in hell you can defend these a$$holes - not today, and not anytime moving forward. It's a cancer, and that's it. 

Yup, you're CUCKoo for MAGA coco puffs aka young girls 

[Deluge]

10 minutes ago, SkyHigh said:

Yup, you're CUCKoo for MAGA coco puffs aka young girls 

Good one, comrade, but we both know who the real cuck is, and it isn't me.  

Here's a little something exposing your favorite form of existence:

 

Edited October 14, 2024 by Deluge

[Nationalist]

1 hour ago, SkyHigh said:

Of course I agree that "anarchistic freedom" is unattainable but I also assume that you agree that some restrictions on freedom are also necessary for a functioning society. As the saying goes "my freedom to swing my arms ends millimeters from your nose".

I've mentioned the financial freedoms that our system promotes that the US system categorically doesn't offer. I used this topic as a jumping off point specifically as this came directly from a study produces by the Fraser institute and the heritage foundation two clearly conservative outlets one Canadian one American, so your side (again I have no side, other than maybe that of supporting my nation) agrees with me at least on this point.

So other than property rights (an issue you'd agree is more complex than simply saying Canadians have none) and guns which is something that is really a non-issue for a strong majority of Canadians and also comes with many, many downsides (see mass shootings, accidental shootings (leading cause of death in children) and suicide) personally I've never needed or wanted a gun and I grew up in arguably some of the toughest parts of this country.

So specifically what freedoms that do exist in the US do you feel don't in Canada?

First of all...the US does have UI and welfare. 

Second...it was you who claimed Canada has more freedoms than the US, and so the onus is on you to prove that...which I don't see that you have. I would even argue that freedom of speech is in the US column.

[CdnFox]

3 hours ago, SkyHigh said:

Honestly, I still fail to see how my personal experiences and opinions as they relate to my short comings (writing ability) and my thoughts on why many people that lack exposure to other cultures (French québécois was my example) are more likely to be xenophobic, could be construed as partisan but as we have already agreed this is probably not the most substantial issue we could be discussing, let's move on 

So, in the interest of continuing this newfound civility between us, I invite you to select any topic you feel best represents your political philosophy and we shall discuss.

EDIT: I will endeavor to do my best to refrain from using personal experience if you can commit to using the principal of charity whilst reading my attempts to express myself in a medium in which I admittedly am weak . Deal?

I can't really help your failure to see. 

There is a very old saying -  if you think you're a good guy and 1000 other people think you're a jerk, it doesn't matter if you're right.  Not saying you're a jerk but it is true that if that's how it's coming across to others, your understanding of their perspective or lack thereof doesn't really change anything. That's how they will perceive it and so you need to think about how you wish to be percieved. 

Quote

EDIT: I will endeavor to do my best to refrain from using personal experience if you can commit to using the principal of charity whilst reading my attempts to express myself in a medium in which I admittedly am weak . Deal?

The charity part is fine, as to personal experience there's nothing wrong with mentioning personal experience. Personal experiences with something can be informative and useful in a discussion.  If we were talking about guns for example my noting that i have extensive experience with firearms would be relevant and would give some context to my comments. 

I think tho that you want to keep it that short. And don't rely on it exclusively. Otherwise it can come across as pretentious. 

 

As to our next subject lets not derail the thread here, i'm sure one will come up naturally amongst the various posts and we'll have a chance to discuss things again and while we may be passionate in our postions we can try to be civil and see how it goes.  As a general rule I do like to repay civility with civility and insult with insult and i suspect you feel the same, and i think we can respect our disagreements 

Edited October 14, 2024 by CdnFox

[SkyHigh]

1 hour ago, Nationalist said:

First of all...the US does have UI and welfare. 

Second...it was you who claimed Canada has more freedoms than the US, and so the onus is on you to prove that...which I don't see that you have. I would even argue that freedom of speech is in the US column.

Ok I've specified this many times,  the US doesn't have health care and again not my opinion it's that of the heritage foundation and the Frasier institute. If you're not even going to acknowledge my points I see no reason to continue 

[SkyHigh]

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

There is a very old saying -  if you think you're a good guy and 1000 other people think you're a jerk, it doesn't matter if you're right.  Not saying you're a jerk but it is true that if that's how it's coming across to others, your understanding of their perspective or lack thereof doesn't really change anything. That's how they will perceive it and so you need to think about how you wish to be percieved.

I would say I agree with that, but still don't understand how it pertains to what I said. Could you please use specific examples taken directly from posts I made to better illustrate your point.

I would suggest that part of the problem is you're reading my posts with preconceived ideas of what I'm trying to say, and some of your objections to the style (as you have not yet commented on substance) of what I say come from the fact that neither of us was truly trying to communicate in good faith but simply to one up each other.

[SkyHigh]

3 hours ago, Deluge said:

My god, you are stupid

You know what? You're right 

Agreeing with you on anything, much less trying to find common ground with a pervert was not very intelligent. I guess stooping to your level makes it unavoidable to lower ones IQ , if only to be able to communicate on the primary school level of logic you operate under.

You're not even fun to laugh at anymore because you just keep repeating things you know to be false. At least come up with some new nonsense so you're incoherent rants stay fresh.

 

[Nationalist]

3 hours ago, SkyHigh said:

Ok I've specified this many times,  the US doesn't have health care and again not my opinion it's that of the heritage foundation and the Frasier institute. If you're not even going to acknowledge my points I see no reason to continue 

I get your points. Hell our HC system got 2 stents installed in me within a couple weeks. You understand that we pay for that privilege...right?

Edited October 14, 2024 by Nationalist

[Deluge]

39 minutes ago, SkyHigh said:

You know what? You're right 

Agreeing with you on anything, much less trying to find common ground with a pervert was not very intelligent. I guess stooping to your level makes it unavoidable to lower ones IQ , if only to be able to communicate on the primary school level of logic you operate under.

You're not even fun to laugh at anymore because you just keep repeating things you know to be false. At least come up with some new nonsense so you're incoherent rants stay fresh.

The common ground is that we both believe Marxism is wrong. Why can't you be content with that? 

[SkyHigh]

49 minutes ago, Deluge said:

The common ground is that we both believe Marxism is wrong. Why can't you be content with that? 

Yet you continue to accuse me of the opposite. The problem is you don't have a point, all you have is silly partisan talking points that you yourself betray in order to "own the libs" even if the other interlocutor isn't a "lib"

You're just sad

[SkyHigh]

1 hour ago, Nationalist said:

I get your points. Hell out HC system got 2 stents installed in my within a couple weeks. You understand that we pay for that privilege...right?

Yes I know we pay for health care (it does cost us less per capita than Americans and we rank higher on many comparisons) but that's irrelevant, my(and the heritage foundations) point was that in terms of financial freedom (maybe the one I care most about) the ability to change jobs and/or start something yourself and possibly hire new employees, is exponentially easier when you don't need to worry about (you or your possible dependents or potential employees and their possible dependants) getting sick. Much more than the ability to say something offensive or hateful. So unless you can provide an example where someone faced any true government prosecution for simple speech, I fall to see how we have less freedom of speech than our neighbors to the south, regardless of if it's enshrined in their constitution.

Oh and I did say "Arguably" more freedom, an important distinction.

[Nationalist]

38 minutes ago, SkyHigh said:

Yes I know we pay for health care (it does cost us less per capita than Americans and we rank higher on many comparisons) but that's irrelevant, my(and the heritage foundations) point was that in terms of financial freedom (maybe the one I care most about) the ability to change jobs and/or start something yourself and possibly hire new employees, is exponentially easier when you don't need to worry about (you or your possible dependents or potential employees and their possible dependants) getting sick. Much more than the ability to say something offensive or hateful. So unless you can provide an example where someone faced any true government prosecution for simple speech, I fall to see how we have less freedom of speech than our neighbors to the south, regardless of if it's enshrined in their constitution.

Oh and I did say "Arguably" more freedom, an important distinction.

Well...freezing all those truckers' bank accounts, for one.

[CdnFox]

4 hours ago, SkyHigh said:

 

I would suggest that part of the problem is you're reading my posts with preconceived ideas of what I'm trying to say, and some of your objections to the style (as you have not yet commented on substance) of what I say come from the fact that neither of us was truly trying to communicate in good faith but simply to one up each other.

I'm certain there's truth to that but the fact is every single person who writes anything that you write is going to come to it with preconceived ideas. So the trick is to try and minimize the opportunity for misunderstanding. And I guess what I was saying is the method that you chose to express yourself in has a high probability of being misunderstood compared to other ways

[SkyHigh]

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

I'm certain there's truth to that but the fact is every single person who writes anything that you write is going to come to it with preconceived ideas. So the trick is to try and minimize the opportunity for misunderstanding. And I guess what I was saying is the method that you chose to express yourself in has a high probability of being misunderstood compared to other ways

I will accept that, as I believe it was expressed in good faith.

[SkyHigh]

10 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

If you're engaging with someone you have no respect for, You really are wasting your time.

If I was expecting a thoughtful conversation in which I could grow in my understanding of life and the cosmos, I would completely agree.

But, since I'm just bored because I'm stuck in some podunk town and other than helping my mom and doing some work around her house, have nothing to occupy my brain. I think my time is well spent laughing at simpletons, beats making fun of the kids at the primary school a few blocks away. Hahahaha 

[SkyHigh]

16 hours ago, Nationalist said:

Well...freezing all those truckers' bank accounts, for one.

Well, I have friends that live downtown Ottawa and from their perspective, what they did was a heck of a lot more than just speech. So not relevant.

I'm not saying I agree with what happened, just that it's not a case of violating free speech.

[Nationalist]

3 minutes ago, SkyHigh said:

Well, I have friends that live downtown Ottawa and from their perspective, what they did was a heck of a lot more than just speech. So not relevant.

I'm not saying I agree with what happened, just that it's not a case of violating free speech.

Dude...I worked for DFAIT for years. I know those government workers and how the bureaucracy functions.

You don't have to believe me but, those bureaucratic cling-ons are chalk full of self importance and entitlement. 

[SkyHigh]

2 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

Dude...I worked for DFAIT for years. I know those government workers and how the bureaucracy functions.

You don't have to believe me but, those bureaucratic cling-ons are chalk full of self importance and entitlement. 

What does any of that have to do with free speech?

[Deluge]

18 hours ago, SkyHigh said:

Yet you continue to accuse me of the opposite. The problem is you don't have a point, all you have is silly partisan talking points that you yourself betray in order to "own the libs" even if the other interlocutor isn't a "lib"

You're just sad

You are the opposite. You're STILL the opposite because you're trying to defend the democrat party. Liberals and leftists try to defend the democrat party. Communists, socialists and marxists try to defend the democrat party. Which one are you? 

 

[myata]

Sanity is even more basic than patriotism. It's great to be a patriot, and one has to be sane as well. There's only one sane choice here. Everybody has seen that. Everybody knows that. And there's no escaping that, except at the cost of sanity itself.

[SkyHigh]

17 minutes ago, Deluge said:

You are the opposite. You're STILL the opposite because you're trying to defend the democrat party. Liberals and leftists try to defend the democrat party. Communists, socialists and marxists try to defend the democrat party. Which one are you? 

 

Dude you're literally arguing against yourself.

Small l liberal I'll accept, as that is defined as protecting the minority from decisions made by the majority and I'm all for that.

As far as Marxist, Communist, Socialist (all words you clearly don't understand) or leftist (a word that doesn't mean anything) neither I nor the Democrats are any of those things.

Again I don't support the Democrats and if I was American (again I'm Canadian, so I don't vote in the US) I would have numerous problems with their policies, but all of my problems are rooted in reality, therefore will never comport with the mad incoherent ravings coming out of your mouth. 

You're just sad

Edited October 15, 2024 by SkyHigh

[Nationalist]

1 hour ago, SkyHigh said:

What does any of that have to do with free speech?

You said your friends I Ottawa told you the truckers did another more than just speak...or protest. I said I worked with a lot of those people and know what sort of people they are. I remember the stories from that time and doubt those self-absorbed jack-asses were put out at all.

[Deluge]

15 minutes ago, SkyHigh said:

Dude you're literally arguing against yourself.

Small l liberal I'll accept, as that is defined as protecting the minority from decisions made by the majority and I'm all for that.

As far as Marxist, Communist, Socialist (all words you clearly don't understand) or leftist (a word that doesn't mean anything) neither I nor the Democrats are any of those things.

Again I don't support the Democrats and if I was American (again I'm Canadian, so I don't vote in the US) I would have numerous problems with their policies, but all of my problems are rooted in reality, therefore will never comport with the mad incoherent ravings coming out of your mouth. 

You're just sad

No, liberalism is defined as being broad-minded and tolerant. The problem with that is it's a gateway to leftism and that is what is running the democrat party. 

Now, for some jackass reason, you think your text book understanding supersedes what is actually going on, and that is not the case. The democrat party right now IS left, therefore it is NOT American.

- Democrats are always crying about the rich; is that a Karl Marx thing or is it an Adam Smith thing? 

- Democrats are always trying to f*ck with gun rights. Is that a 2nd Amendment thing, or is that an anti-2nd Amendment thing?

- Democrats want open borders. Is that an American thing, or is it an anti-American thing? 

- Democrats want to force legalized abortion on all 50 states. Is that a Communist thing, or is it a State's rights thing? 

What do you think?