A question and a challenge.

[eccieuser9500]

Hardy har har.

[The_Waco_Kid]

Originally Posted by eccieuser9500

I AM tired. If it was a better game and I had a lighter beer than Fat Tire I wouldn't be so despondent from a lack philosophical response to the question of which is leftist versus which is righ wing knowledge, reality, and existence when it comes to existential freedom.

Oh well. Fuck it.


So. To bring this back to the original topic of the thread: imagine an American society of a strict reading of the Constitution against an evolving view of the Constitution.

Scalia was a scum bag. Just had to throw that out there.

"Joe! One for the road."

so you thinck Scalia was a scumbag for being an originalist who felt the constitution as written should be interpreted as such? i guess you want an evolving constitution so you can re-write the intent of the founding fathers?


doesn't surprise me at all.

[lustylad]

Originally Posted by eccieuser9500

It was plain English...

I'm afraid I'll have to explain THAT to her too...

Illogical extrapolation.

There hasn't been a word of "plain English" in any of your posts in this thread.

You haven't EXPLAINED diddlysquat to anyone. You've been INVITED to explain yourself multiple times. But you're too dumb, incoherent and chickenshit to do so. The fact that you fancy yourself as capable of any kind of philosophical thinking is hilarious!

You keep screaming "illogical extrapolation" yet somehow you can't tell us what the logical extrapolation is.

You're a fraud.

[eccieuser9500]

Originally Posted by eccieuser9500

I AM tired. If it was a better game and I had a lighter beer than Fat Tire I wouldn't be so despondent from a lack philosophical response to the question of which is leftist versus which is righ wing knowledge, reality, and existence when it comes to existential freedom.

Oh well. Fuck it.


So. To bring this back to the original topic of the thread: imagine an American society of a strict reading of the Constitution against an evolving view of the Constitution.

Scalia was a scum bag. Just had to throw that out there.

"Joe! One for the road."

Originally Posted by lustylad

Evidently you didn't read the full transcript either. Trump said Nazis "should be condemned totally". But that truth doesn't fit your phony "trump-is-a-nazi" narrative, so you suppress and distort what he actually said.

Read this and maybe the truth will sink in, although I doubt it.

Puhhhhh-leeeeez!

Nice try little lady.

I'm not that drunk yet dickhead.

[Levianon17]

Originally Posted by eccieuser9500

So I guess you're okay with an even swap? The question is: How much should an individual pay for the greater good of the society? Should I pay for a bridge to be built in Yamacraw Island to connect to the mainland if I'm not going to benefit from the build? Should you? Would you?

This thread has taken a philosophical turn at Albuquerque.




















Three to zero in favor of Mexico.

How much should we pay in taxes for the greater good? That's a hard question to answer. I think first we must define what is "The Greater Good". I think you might get several definitions of that. Our so called leaders define it for us. I think it might have something to do with how deep their pockets are. At the end of the year if I can break even or get a little bit back that's a win for me, at least until I can find a better plan. The Government is like a slot machine it's really not designed for you to win.

[lustylad]

Originally Posted by eccielover

Cmon EC9500. I wasn't going to comment but you are getting ridiculous now.

You fucked up in your statement, admit it.

You brought up Nambla, tree huggers, etc. to try and disassociate yourself from the far left while maintaining your far left persona.

The initial response was perfectly logical in that you were attributing those attributes to the far left in general, otherwise, why try to differentiate yourself from them.

You were called out and now you are trying to pretend you didn't actually "say" that.

Sorry, "it's what I said, but not what I meant" is not an excuse.

When I was young, I called my father a "motherfucker" one day. I tried to explain to him that I meant it as a term of endearment as in "fucking my mother". The obvious meaning was otherwise. See.

+1

Yep, you nailed it!

Maybe we can extrapolate?

Poor Lenny Bruce is naked on the cold bathroom floor, curled up in the fetal position with a bloody syringe hanging out of his arm.

Rather pathetic if you ask me.

[The_Waco_Kid]

Originally Posted by lustylad

+1

Yep, you nailed it!

Maybe we can extrapolate?

Poor Lenny Bruce is naked on the cold bathroom floor, curled up in the fetal position with a bloody syringe hanging out of his arm.

Rather pathetic if you ask me.

that's why i always remove his picture from ecky9.5k's posts. and all the useless hot air.

[andymarksman]

Originally Posted by lustylad

Who the fuck refers to pedophiles as "free will seekers"?

You're a sick freak!

How much did Jeffrey Epstein pay you to help him exercise his "free will"?

Are we in 2030s yet? Just wondering because you sounded like we were already there...


https://www.eccie.net/showthread.php?t=1042202

[rexdutchman]

Oh yeah the NAZI'S took advantage of the disarming gee how that work out

[eccieuser9500]

Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid

so you thinck Scalia was a scumbag for being an originalist who felt the constitution as written should be interpreted as such? i guess you want an evolving constitution so you can re-write the intent of the founding fathers?


doesn't surprise me at all.

It doesn't surprise me you would keep slaves.

Jordan Peterson, Noam Chomsky, and What We Mean by “Left” and “Right”



https://merionwest.com/2019/09/06/jo...eft-and-right/

It is, by no means, perfect, but ideology is not going away, and I see no use in trying to fight that fact. Moreover, I think finding a more or less accurate—even if idealized—explanation of the dichotomy would help address some of its criticisms. It would also, I believe, help explain why people on each side of the spectrum may feel closer affinity with others on the same side even if, in principle, there are some people on the other side of the spectrum who are theoretically more closely aligned.

[the_real_Barleycorn]

Originally Posted by eccieuser9500

I AM tired. If it was a better game and I had a lighter beer than Fat Tire I wouldn't be so despondent from a lack philosophical response to the question of which is leftist versus which is righ wing knowledge, reality, and existence when it comes to existential freedom.

Oh well. Fuck it.


So. To bring this back to the original topic of the thread: imagine an American society of a strict reading of the Constitution against an evolving view of the Constitution.

Scalia was a scum bag. Just had to throw that out there.

"Joe! One for the road."

My thread and I'm calling out on strikes and bullshit. Go back and read what I asked. Nothing about a strict reading versus a liberal reading. The Constitution is what it is. It is the basis for the law of the land. It is designed to be changed but only under great pressure so that all sides get a say. The left wants to circumvent and make a de facto change without going through the process of discussion.

[eccieuser9500]

Originally Posted by eccieuser9500

Beleive it or not, I'm not a conscientious objector. I'm far left but not a tree huggin', NAMBLA defendin', ban all firearms, kumbaya singin' peacenik. I served. I see the value of, and enthusiasm for, defense weapons. I'm reminded of Forrest Gump assembling the rifle in company record time. (Okay okay I'll close)

The record is a botch, isn't it?

Originally Posted by Levianon17

C'mon dude what's the point of this thread?

Originally Posted by lustylad

Why drag queens? Couldn't you get any of your NAMBLA pals to volunteer for this? I heard they like to hang out in the children's books section at your local library.

Originally Posted by lustylad

Riiiiiiiiight!! Can't fight the "winds of change". Can't fight the "incoming tide". You fucking progs always imagine yourselves to be the wave of the future. You're too blind and stupid to see that the future you want to force on the rest of us is an ugly dystopian one. The winds constantly shift and blow in many directions. The tide always rolls back out.




They're your pals, not mine. Remember - you put them on the far left, next to yourself. Better run down to your local library now and see who is prowling in the childrens' books section. Uh-oh! Do you let your kids browse the stacks?

Originally Posted by lustylad

You don't you have any "gal pals"? Then why the fuck did you start a thread on drag queens?!?

Originally Posted by dilbert firestorm

guys keep it square!!!

Originally Posted by lustylad

Ellen is a NAMBLA defender.

[eccieuser9500]

Barley comes off combative. With this old one. And the new thread.

[Yssup Rider]

A challenge implies combat.

He’s marinated