Recent posts by unleashthemind on Kongregate

Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Why do the liberal Democrats want to take guns away from Americans?

Originally posted by vikaTae:

So basically Jhco, your real concern is that you don’t trust the government to handle registrations in a sensible manner, not that you disagree with regulation itself. Would that be correct?

The trust of the government is usually the biggest difference between the left and the right; with the left trusting and the right not willing to make themselves vulnerable.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Should the state be allowed to dictate morality?

No it should not. You’re not free at all if you’re not free to choose wrong.

However, the place of government is to insure others may not infringe on your rights; and there is some overlap on these two things.
Ex: killing someone is infringing on their right to life however it is also considered morally wrong.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Militia

I think that not only should they be ALLOWED to form a militia, but that they SHOULD form militias.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / U.S. Presidential Election

Originally posted by softest_voice:

Anyhoo, in election news;
South Carolina’s chief election official testifies about the proposed voter ID law.
Testifies about how it effectively disenfranchises legitimate voters.

The GOP is working overtime to keep people from voting.
Amidst the rhetoric from the far Right about treason, I find it interesting that the Right is engaged in activity that strikes at the very heart of democracy.

With all of the documented voter fraud going on, I’m surprised the voter ID law isn’t already enacted.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Why do the liberal Democrats want to take guns away from Americans?

Originally posted by karmakoolkid:
Originally posted by unleashthemind:
Originally posted by Retry:


Karma:I would do my best to deescalate the situation by offering to help them get my shit out of the house & into their car.

XD

Originally posted by Retry:

^That quote is at the bottom of paragraph 7 or 8 of his.

YES, I said that (although it is heavily OUT OF CONTEXT) and will expound upon the thinking behind it if necessary.

BUT, what part of DEESCALATE is hard to understand?
Maybe for the Rambo types….I guess.

Not to insult your manhood or anything but I’d rather fight an armed man unharmed and get shot than offer them my stuff. Not because I put some high value on stuff but rather a pride thing.

“Rambo types” I like that.

I like that a lot.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Why do Americans put up with bad politicians?

If people weren’t ignorant there would be no problem.

Why don’t you want us to not discuss

RONPAULRONPAULRONPAUL
?
Seems pretty relevant to me.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Why do the liberal Democrats want to take guns away from Americans?

Originally posted by Retry:


Karma:I would do my best to deescalate the situation by offering to help them get my shit out of the house & into their car.

XD

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / U.S. Presidential Election

Originally posted by vikaTae:
Originally posted by jhco50:

Interesting, I didn’t know that was why he lost so many of the black vote. I think he is trying to get the gay vote now that he has changed his mind on that subject.

That’s an incredible change of mind, especially considering fighting for equal rights for LGBT constituted some of his campaign promises the first time around. Imagine that, changing your mind, and having your mind be exactly the same as before you changed it.

I also like the way there is a “black vote”, as if black people are not capable of being individuals, and must vote en-masse if they vote at all.


Originally posted by jhco50:

You mean our Democrats are considered conservative in your country? What country is that?

Most of the first-world countries would consider the Democrats to be right-wing, and the Republicans to be extreme right wing.

If they are not right encough for you, that puts you within the bounds of fascism. There are quite a few neo-Nazi groups even in Europe, which would welcome your membership, Jhco. Have you considered finding a local chapter?

“Black vote” is just a term used when saying a campaign is targeting a specific demographic audience, but yes you are correct.

Which is funny because i think of most democrats to be closer to the left wing, but I suppose that’s because I’m a libertarian which is far right. However on both my account and the former you have to remember perception is often not the reality.

Why fascism instead of libertarianism? It would make more sense that way because fascism has a very large government and conservatives go for a smaller government.
And fascism can be considered far right just like communism can be considered far left.
And the neo-nazi thing was a little bit low don’t you think?

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / New Racism

As long as when they see someone from another race fitting that same stereotype they react the same. For example a white drug dealer wearing gang attire.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / U.S. Presidential Election

Originally posted by Ketsy:

I imagine that if Obama was acting unconstitutionally, it would be pretty big news.

So basically, do you have any sort of real evidence that the way he is acting is unconstitutional? Preferably something that others would consider a valid source. It would also be preferable if it is something unique to him, and not a common practice by presidents in the past.

You’re kidding me, right? First of all, there has been lots of buzz about him not following the constitution; that accusation is not out of the blue. Second of all the NDAA, the Patriot act, and the war on terror are all unconstitutional.
The Patriot act violates the 4th amendment, the NDAA violates the 5th and 6th amendment and congress has the power to declare war not the president and Obama is continuing what Bush started.

Also please don’t misinterpret this; I do not support Bush or Romney because they both support the above^, I simply don’t support Obama and want a president that would follow the constitution like Ron Paul or Gary Johnson.

Originally posted by OmegaDoom:

still better than Reagan’s league of criminals; still better than George Bush’s warmongering and enemy creation; still better than George junior’s putting people in prison and torturing them without trial or anything, against internatoinal treaties and their own laws.

If you want to help our country, voting for what you think might be the lesser of two evils will not suffice.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / How Far Should We Go To Help The Disabled?

How about putting into account the value of human life?

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / How Far Should We Go To Help The Disabled?

Originally posted by Azolf:

Some great arguments against eugenics here. Overspecialization breeds weaknesses.

Eugenics leads to less variety so it leaves you less able to cope as a species when faced with new dangers such as diseases.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / How Far Should We Go To Help The Disabled?

You guys realize that QuabbinHiker is trolling? Read his profile.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Why do the liberal Democrats want to take guns away from Americans?

Originally posted by Twilight_Ninja:
Originally posted by jhco50:

I am getting a bit nervous that, although you are being sarcastic, we very well could have a rebellion. Why else would Homeland Security purchase large amounts of ammunition, hollow points at that. when did HS become a national police force? The FBI has been purchasing large amounts of ammunition as well. Why do they all need so much ammunition? Now the Social Security Administration is ordering a large amount of ammunition…for what?

Look at all of the anger in this country. Crime seems to be rampant lately. This is why we should all be armed.

Owning a gun for personal defense is fine, but if you’re talking about going up against an organization like FBI, Homeland Security, National Guard…..your guns won’t help you (no matter how many you think you have) and you don’t have a chance. Really pointless in this instance.

Not one person but say if the gov’t went completely tyrannical the people would at least have a fighting chance with a militia.

Originally posted by jhco50:
Originally posted by Twilight_Ninja:
Originally posted by jhco50:

I am getting a bit nervous that, although you are being sarcastic, we very well could have a rebellion. Why else would Homeland Security purchase large amounts of ammunition, hollow points at that. when did HS become a national police force? The FBI has been purchasing large amounts of ammunition as well. Why do they all need so much ammunition? Now the Social Security Administration is ordering a large amount of ammunition…for what?

Look at all of the anger in this country. Crime seems to be rampant lately. This is why we should all be armed.

Owning a gun for personal defense is fine, but if you’re talking about going up against an organization like FBI, Homeland Security, National Guard…..your guns won’t help you (no matter how many you think you have) and you don’t have a chance. Really pointless in this instance.

It won’t be me necessarily. If our country turns to this type of correction it will be a whole lot of angry people Look at some of the countries out there who are taking their countries back and grabbing freedom. Look at Syria and what they are willing to give up to get rid or the tyranny in that country. You can only keep the lid on a boiling pot for so long before it comes off on it’s own.

Originally posted by Twilight_Ninja:
Originally posted by jhco50:

I am getting a bit nervous that, although you are being sarcastic, we very well could have a rebellion. Why else would Homeland Security purchase large amounts of ammunition, hollow points at that. when did HS become a national police force? The FBI has been purchasing large amounts of ammunition as well. Why do they all need so much ammunition? Now the Social Security Administration is ordering a large amount of ammunition…for what?

Look at all of the anger in this country. Crime seems to be rampant lately. This is why we should all be armed.

Owning a gun for personal defense is fine, but if you’re talking about going up against an organization like FBI, Homeland Security, National Guard…..your guns won’t help you (no matter how many you think you have) and you don’t have a chance. Really pointless in this instance.

The way I see it is you give the gov’t an inch of power and they’ll take a mile; then it’s only time before the gov’t directs this power into something heinous and a civil war of some type erupts.
Hopefully we the people can scale back on giving the gov’t power but “we” seem to be intent on giving them full reigns.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / U.S. Presidential Election

http://www.isidewith.com
97% Ron Paul
97% Gary Johnson

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / How Far Should We Go To Help The Disabled?

Originally posted by karmakoolkid:
Originally posted by unleashthemind:

Because this is a very wide topic I am going to focus on my opinion in a very narrow example.
Lets say there is a government building with stairs at the entrance, the government may decide to make this wheelchair accessible and I would condone this. Another example; private business with stairs is forced by the government to make itself accessible to people who have to use wheelchairs, this I would not condone.

Just so I’m clear on what ya mean by “private business”, do ya mean a PRIVATELY OWNED business? Or, do ya mean a business that IS “private”….OPEN ONLY to members, a “private club//organization”?

If a business is open to the PUBLIC,,,
are ya saying it should be able to DISCRIMINATE against ppl w/,,say,,ambulatory disabilities? Hell, let’s ban the blind from restaurants if the menus aren’t in Braille.
Let’s not let them drive….Ooooops, there ARE limits to what can be done to accommodate particular “disabilities”.

Let me tear that word apart:
DIS = is an active prefix which continues to form nouns, adjectives, adverbs, and verbs, with the meaning ‘not’ or ‘the reverse’ with reference to the meaning of the word it is attached to.
ABILITY = •The quality of being able to do something, especially the physical, mental, financial, or legal power to accomplish something.
• A natural or acquired skill or talent.
• The quality of being suitable for or receptive to a specified treatment; capacity:

I hope we don’t let this discussion focus ONLY on those w/ physical “limitations”. I hope we can include “mental” also. AND, I’m hoping I can draw some “parallels” of the “financially disabled” to show any similarities—both in difficulties AND what the govt. (private sector?) is doing//can do about it—so that “insights” might be had.

BUT, this thread should be a really good one.
One that I hope can be far less “contentious” than a few others.

Privately owned.
Personally, I wouldn’t say it’s discrimination just because people aren’t forced to going out of their way to accommodation others.
Lets say we have a small family operating a restaurant, they are very poor and are living “paycheck to paycheck”. However to get up to their place of business you have to go up three stairs. They can’t afford to make this wheel-chair accessible (simplest example I could think of) but the gov’t comes in and gives them a choice to make it accessible or be shut down; these people can’t afford it and would be shut down. I am advocating for a more free market, which would likely follow the current rules regardless once it is cost effective.
Now let’s say it was a case of discrimination, it is not someone’s right to be served at restaurant even if someone else’s family is being served. Also it isn’t fair to say they have an obligation to serve anyone, if they should choose not. A smart business that would thrive however would not have discrimination so that discriminating business will ultimately stop discriminating or lose business.

Originally posted by BobTheCoolGuy:

As someone said above, one model would be to force anything public (gvnt-controlled) to be accessible, while letting private businesses choose how much they want to do. In the private sector, I could see a couple of things happening with this plan. 1) Businesses might drop most accessibility features unless they were cost effective – making something accessible for a certain amount of money brought in more money in the long run. Problem is, I doubt many things would do this. Correct me if I’m wrong, I could be. 2) Businesses might voluntarily comply with government standards because they don’t want the negative PR that would come if they didn’t. Problem with this is that helping the disabled isn’t really the most trendy thing right now.

This plan would also give the private sector an advantage over anything public. I’m not entirely sure, in the US at leas,t, how much private/public competition there is. Schools maybe?

I agree ^

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / How Far Should We Go To Help The Disabled?

Because this is a very wide topic I am going to focus on my opinion in a very narrow example.
Lets say there is a government building with stairs at the entrance, the government may decide to make this wheelchair accessible and I would condone this. Another example; private business with stairs is forced by the government to make itself accessible to people who have to use wheelchairs, this I would not condone.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Off-topic / Happy birthday Dr. Ron Paul

Happy 77th Birthday!!! :)
Long live my leader.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Off-topic / What is your opinion on people who think this?

Smart enough to realize there is corruption in the system, however not well-researched enough to realize the honest and educated politicians around as well.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / U.S. Presidential Election

Originally posted by jhco50:
Originally posted by unleashthemind:

They both are pretty liberal. Romney just hides behind a Republican mask; his voting record says different.

Originally posted by OmegaDoom:

third party.


I would consider Romney a moderate, just right of center. Paul Ryan is conservative. I think Romneys choice of VP was to placate those who want strong conservatism. Third party is fine, but because 3rd parties are never elected it would be a wasted vote for the most part. There are a lot of good people in 3rd parties though.


I see what you’re saying about Romney, to be honest I have very high standards so I can be harsh. As for the wasted vote, I figure if everyone would vote for the better candidate instead of who is popular we would have a better system; this however is idealistic and would require people to actually do their own research on politics…
Originally posted by Twilight_Ninja:
Originally posted by jhco50:
I heard today that he just raided the Medicaid fund and is cutting that program back tremendously. This is a direct assault on the poor. He is planning to do away with Medicare and Medicaid in his next term. This will hurt both the elderly and the poor directly. Is this what we want?

Those two programs are important for the poor, but (no offense) what do you care? I thought you reviled Medicaid as another socialist program used by those who want to live on the government and not stand on their own two feet.

We are partners not master and slave.

How then, can the final decision go to the man? Unequal decision making power =/= partnership.


To the thread: I’m leaning towards Romney (because dammit, Ron Paul doesn’t have a chance). Don’t know how I feel about the Obamacare as I haven’t learned enough about it from unbiased sources, but the amnesty granted towards illegal immigrants swayed me that direction. I think that would put too great a stress on our resources at a time when we’re already very tight.

“Ron Paul doesn’t have a chance” :(

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / U.S. Presidential Election

They both are pretty liberal. Romney just hides behind a Republican mask; his voting record says different.

Originally posted by OmegaDoom:

third party.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Off-topic / When was the last time you had coffee?

Never, religious reasons.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Off-topic / okay.. ive been struggling with this question

Who cares about slash? And from a mythical point of view, Chuck Norris pwns all.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Off-topic / Fear of an end

The first and third

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Who's Healthcare plan is better??

Neither we need to privatize any healthcare in the United States.