Let's get real here. In the real spirit of TBG, this is not out of line, Philler. Philler, I have been both curious and oddly shocked by your posts over time.
That lined upon the front page in a way that I can't quote or duplicate. but that is no matter because we are here and we mostly disagree. (in fact, I blow you off mostly, except for the sake of community which is not right)
So let that it all and not be confined by the news of the day.
Just for sake of discussion please, explain about how you are the real liberal (from when, I ask respectfully. scene oh let's say who how any, were champion of people 20, 30, 50 years too late.
See my topic about the UAW strike, so we can swap shoes.
But while facing a Constitutional crisis how does you not trusting the jury system help, or matter ?
So if are a liberal, from when ?
Personally, I'm fairly conservative radial.
Deal with it, especially as you say your a traditional (yesterday's? ) liberal ?
Talk to us all Philler, not the specifics like Murdock's FNN host do but as things come to head as THEIR defenders of the status quo, as as our guiding light traditional liberal (doublespeak check needed and give the a watch) how can we support the US Constitution while listening a guy preaching I'm the word on real liberalism but I have no faith in the fundamental jury system, ust for example, not as the topic. ?
Are you a traditional pre-Magna Carta liberal, My Lord ?
Get over being to my NOT BEING A LIBERAL, but a traditional values American radical (think the Tea Party, Lexington Green, this:
... and the bprotests at nuclear power plants BEFORE 3 Mile Island, Chernobyl, and Fukushima Daiichi.
It is just one world, so Gretta Thumberg is the new world patriot.
Re: Let's get real here. In the real spirit of TBG, this is not out of line, Philler. I mostly blow you off too, Cheesy, but what I'm wondering about now is where you got the idea that I claimed to be a liberal of any sort? I sometimes agree with liberals but I'm not really a liberal. I also sometimes agree with libertarians but I'm definitely not one of them either.
I'm far too conservative in many of my views to be a liberal. For example, I'm in favor of capital punishment. I would like to see it used a lot more, especially in the state of California.
I also don't have any big problem with what I consider reasonable censorship, something which liberals tend to be extremely opposed to. What I object to is censorship which doesn't make any sense.
I'm also in favor of nuclear power, another liberal no no.
As for not trusting the jury system and wanting to see it abolished, I don't believe that is either a conservative or liberal view. Probably just a radical view which most Americans would not agree with me about.
One mistake people should always avoid though, and it sounds like you have a great tendency to make it, is discounting what someone has to say because of other views they have. You have to look at each individual claim or argument that someone makes to see if it is a good one. Prejudging it based on your opinion of their previous views is not a good idea.
Re: Let's get real here. In the real spirit of TBG, this is not out of line, Philler. Thank you for setting me straight. In trying to understand you perhaps I mistakenly assigned another political crank's illogical excuses to you as a starting point.
So it not logical to suggest your views are those of an idiosyncratic authoritarian, at best ?
That raises the question of what kind of government might suit your values: opposed to a strong judiciary, in support of limited (State ??? ) censorship so that the people only know what whom, ... you, decide is what they should be allowed to know.
"I'm also in favor of nuclear power" for your short term greedy advantages provided we are not responsible for the technologies' back end problems because our use of the commons to our short term needs is all that matters, given you will not live to see the effects of your greed on the future generations. (Even man for himself cries the elephant as he dances among the chickens ? )
So why isn't it technically correct * to think your ideal government would be an authoritarian totalitarian system, provided it is was one in which you were PC, so part the authoritarian totalitarian elite ?
Learn to pronounce
favoring or enforcing strict obedience to authority, especially that of the government, at the expense of personal freedom.
... LIKE THE RIGHT TO A TRAIL BY YOUR PEERS.
Learn to pronounce
relating to a system of government that is centralized and dictatorial and requires complete subservience to the state.
AS IN "I also don't have any big problem with what I consider reasonable censorship, (by whom ? ). something which liberals tend to be extremely opposed to. What I object to is censorship which doesn't make any sense. AS JUDGE BY WHOM IF NOT A CENTRALIZED GOVERNMENT WHO GOAL IS TO "require complete subservience to the state " ?
Can you tell me if and why that is not technically valid and fair to think, Philler ?
Re: Let's get real here. In the real spirit of TBG, this is not out of line, Philler. I've never thought of Philer as a conservative or liberal, never crossed my mind. Philer marches to the beat of a different drummer, if one wants to put a label, they are out of luck.
Re: Let's get real here. In the real spirit of TBG, this is not out of line, Philler. Yeah. ignore authoritarian totalitarianism until its goals are achieved, right ?
No point in rocking its proponents boats.
That will only anger them and bring out their wrath, sooner rather than later, right ?
So can this be judged by a jury of my peers or shall it be left it to the self appointed authoritarians to judge ?
Re: Let's get real here. In the real spirit of TBG, this is not out of line, Philler. Not right, that is your accusation, which doesn't mean it is true. Who ignores authoritarian totalitarianism and who in this country practices it? Who is "them?"
Re: Let's get real here. In the real spirit of TBG, this is not out of line, Philler. Philer seems to me to be a sort of feminist who loves drugs and capital punishment.
While I'm totally against capital punishment I occasionally agree with her other points of view.
Re: Let's get real here. In the real spirit of TBG, this is not out of line, Philler. Including censorship ?
It is happening already. This;
"Rudy is a Trump branded mouthpiece/shark . Trump does not pay him for "being his lawyer" because Rudy is scamming his divorce settlement, he says.
But given this story, is Rudy paying Trump Inc. to call himself "the POTUS' lawyer" in a branding deal, because of all the (foreign) business it brings in ? Just like with Trump's Washington hotel. Ironically, it is all the sort of business that is not supposed make Rudy have to really represent clients or anything, not even his Bar Ass. ethics , or ever have go into a court room.
Opps, on that last bit.
Was rejected by a big service for comments in my local news paper because it "contained a word of words not permitted"
Can anyone find A WORD instead of all of being being politically incorrect from some points of view that warrants censorship ?
What is unacceptable to the censors (bots) everyone, especially Philler ? Please explain to me why you defend some censorship and so this this being censored ?