Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Captain Risky

Trump wants to bomb hurricanes

110 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

third_eye
8 hours ago, Robotic Jew said:

Maybe we could just send the "constitutionalists" to a forest where they can murder each other for sport to see who survives and ends up with the most stuff.

Uhmm...  Hold your beer for you? 

~

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tatetopa
9 hours ago, RavenHawk said:

There can never be a uniter.  Half the people want free stuff and have government run their lives and the other half want to do things for themselves and keep government out of their lives.  There can only be a split or a purge.  Pro-Constitution vs anti-Constitution.  A split will not last as the Socialist government will eventually collapse and there will proceed to be a purge anyway.  A purge will be with extreme prejudice and I have a feeling that if it goes that far, those that are gun lovers will win out.  In the end, it will probably be healthy for this country to cull the trouble makers and send them to a Socialist nation.  I know that sounds very stark but we have gotten to the point that we can no longer hide the fact that the Constitution and Socialism are by nature, irreconcilable.  Seriously, for those on either side, how can we be united without it being capitulation?  It wouldn’t be a uniter but a conceder or betrayer.

Hi RavenHawk. I just looked through the Constitution tonight.  It seems to set up an excellent list of rights for citizens and limits to government authority to protect those rights.  

Nowhere in the Constitution does it say that the United States will be a free market capitalist country and not a socialist one.

You can certainly put forward an argument for socialism being a less successful form of government, but it is not Unconstitutional.  as far as I can tell.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hammerclaw
Posted (edited)
8 hours ago, Robotic Jew said:

Maybe we could just send the "constitutionalists" to a forest where they can murder each other for sport to see who survives and ends up with the most stuff.

Nah, we got Fortnite for that. Much less messy and with respawns. Send them to Northern Mexico, where only the out-numbered cops and hardcore drug gangs have serious firepower and let'em do some good and practice what they preach. 

Edited by Hammerclaw
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
'Walt' E. Kurtz

That man is very clever......:-P

  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Captain Risky
5 hours ago, joc said:

He apparently has enough 'cojones' to take on the Media...and win!  

A lot of people are saying the same thing. Just how incredibly phenomenally special Trump is. 

  • Haha 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Captain Risky
8 hours ago, aztek said:

yea, twisted, misinterpreted, and taken out of context, just like you always do, always samew bull crap from you.  "trump wants to bomb america"? what an idiotic  title,  at least that was fixed

I don't know... i kinda thought the original title had more panache.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Manwon Lender
Posted (edited)
22 hours ago, pallidin said:

So, Russia "bombed" Europe from the Chernobyl accident?

In effect they certainly did, in fact they bombed the entire planet. When the Chernobyl melt down occurred radiation levels world wide were effected by differing degrees from the atmospheric fallout. The closer you were the more you received, the effects will be present for a long long time.

Edited by Manwon Lender
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
toast
Posted (edited)

#45: "Mike, come over I would like to show you something exiting, I`m in the Oval Office right now"

Pence:" Ok, 5 minutes"

#45:"Hy Mike, look at this thermos flask"

Pence:"Yeah, I own a few by myself"

#45:"It keeps the iced tea cold in the summer and the coffee hot in the winter. Its brilliant, isnt it?"

Pence:"Thats normal"

#45:"Yeah, but how does it know if it's summer or winter? I really would like to know. Maybe Betsy can give an explanation."

#45 on the phone:" Hi Betsy, its me."

...

Edited by toast
  • Haha 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Robotic Jew
14 hours ago, RavenHawk said:

Great!  So you hate the Constitution that much?

 

Not at all. Just taking your ridiculous notion and replacing it with an equal one from the other side.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Buzz_Light_Year
15 hours ago, aztek said:

it works wonders, look at fake outrage anti trump threads here,. 

It's just Trump doing what Trump does fairly well and that's a Real Estate Mogul. Just think of all the real estate that Trump has developed in the 6 inches between their collective ears. If half the population is truly liberal then those 6 inches add up biggley and the amount of real estate is HUUUGE.

Trump living rent free in the liberal mind.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
'Walt' E. Kurtz

If you have a problem, just nuke it :-D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Robotic Jew
Just now, Impedancer said:

If you have a problem, just nuke it :-D

Or a burrito!

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
'Walt' E. Kurtz
11 minutes ago, Robotic Jew said:

Or a burrito!

Haha or Taco bell 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RavenHawk
15 hours ago, lightly said:

And you constantly spew about all the HATE that the "Left" is so full of .!    You seem to be advocating the genocide of a large portion of the population ! ?    ?    

No, I’m not advocating, only stating the obvious of what a 5 year old can see.  If given a chance the hatred of the Left would gladly commit genocide on Deplorables and not give it a second thought.  The right is harder to motivate because they are so easy going, but when pushed, that vengeance will rage and no one will be able to stop it until there is no more blood to spill.  There is plenty of hate on both sides.  The Left have their marching orders but the temperament of the Right can only remain under control for so long.

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RavenHawk
9 hours ago, Hammerclaw said:

By exalting our commonalities--not our differences; by not painting each other, in one broad stroke, with the same brush we should reserve for our extremists. By acknowledging each other's essential humanity and forging a new respect for our sincerely felt differences of opinion and outlook. We are all Americans and we must find the way to live together in hope, in peace and prosperity. If we do not find a way, no one will. 

Before Socialism grabbed as much control as it has, I would have agreed with that sentiment.  However, that just isn’t the case anymore.  It is only our differences that we have in common.  It’s too eerily close to “Let That Be Your Last Battlefield”.  Socialism does not compromise.  It instills no patriotism.  It is a poison that kills cultures.  The Constitution should be our commonality but when the Left wishes to trash it, how can the broad stroke of extremism not fit everyone on the Left?  We should be forging new respect for those that share our love of this nation as founded.  Socialism is so anti-Americanism.  It’s hard to respect someone that hates this country as it is.  Key cornerstones of a nation are Patriotism, Religion (Faith), and Family, but these things have been replaced by Socialism (Proletariat).  That is an abhorrence to the fiber of our existence.  How can there be peace and prosperity in such an environment?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
lightly
1 hour ago, RavenHawk said:

No, I’m not advocating, only stating the obvious of what a 5 year old can see.  If given a chance the hatred of the Left would gladly commit genocide on Deplorables and not give it a second thought.  The right is harder to motivate because they are so easy going, but when pushed, that vengeance will rage and no one will be able to stop it until there is no more blood to spill.  There is plenty of hate on both sides.  The Left have their marching orders but the temperament of the Right can only remain under control for so long.

    Wow ! .     Well, in that case , I'm glad I'm not a 5 year old.

...heaven forbid that we the people spend a few of our tax dollars on ourselves ! !  No, we must support our corporate masters...with subsidies and bailouts and endless contracts.. the net result of which is extreme national debt.  You worship the very ones you've given control to.  Extreme wealth for the richest and most powerful is not "economic growth" .   

i'm probably more fiscally conservative than you are ! 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
aztek

yea, in liberal mind wealth redistribution IS economic growth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RavenHawk
9 hours ago, Tatetopa said:

Hi RavenHawk. I just looked through the Constitution tonight.  It seems to set up an excellent list of rights for citizens and limits to government authority to protect those rights. 

Correct.  That is a main difference.  A Constitutional Republic guarantees protections of individual rights.  Any other form of government will grant rights.  Is that too subtle?  Socialism will dictate which rights it thinks one should have.  Some will have more rights than others.

 

Nowhere in the Constitution does it say that the United States will be a free market capitalist country and not a socialist one.

Technically no, but I do think it is implied in the body of the Founding Documents.  Article IV.4 does guarantee every state to have a Republican form of government.  If the Federal government was not also Republican, why would it guarantee that to the states?  A free market means that it is free from tyrannical control as is found in a Monarchy.  One of the central motivations of the Revolution was the taxation practices imposed.  With this royal oversight, there could not be a free market.  Socialism is just a Monarchy without the Monarch.  The economy under Socialism is always tightly controlled.

 

You can certainly put forward an argument for socialism being a less successful form of government, but it is not Unconstitutional.  as far as I can tell.

It is a historical fact that Socialism (any flavor) is not a successful form.  It merely transitions into another poor form for the next generation to suffer through.  Actually, the Preamble is perhaps the best case against Socialism.  Socialism cannot provide the 5 charges found there, especially securing the blessings of liberty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RavenHawk
4 hours ago, Robotic Jew said:

Not at all. Just taking your ridiculous notion and replacing it with an equal one from the other side.

My *notion* was considering both sides.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hammerclaw
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, RavenHawk said:

Before Socialism grabbed as much control as it has, I would have agreed with that sentiment.  However, that just isn’t the case anymore.  It is only our differences that we have in common.  It’s too eerily close to “Let That Be Your Last Battlefield”.  Socialism does not compromise.  It instills no patriotism.  It is a poison that kills cultures.  The Constitution should be our commonality but when the Left wishes to trash it, how can the broad stroke of extremism not fit everyone on the Left?  We should be forging new respect for those that share our love of this nation as founded.  Socialism is so anti-Americanism.  It’s hard to respect someone that hates this country as it is.  Key cornerstones of a nation are Patriotism, Religion (Faith), and Family, but these things have been replaced by Socialism (Proletariat).  That is an abhorrence to the fiber of our existence.  How can there be peace and prosperity in such an environment?

 

Nothing has replaced anything and there are things the government should do and should not do. Medicare and Social Security are Socialist programs. Try prying them out of the hands of Americans now!

Edited by Hammerclaw

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RavenHawk
26 minutes ago, lightly said:

    Wow ! .     Well, in that case , I'm glad I'm not a 5 year old.

You could have fooled me.

 

...heaven forbid that we the people spend a few of our tax dollars on ourselves ! !  

There’s nothing wrong with spending a few tax dollars on ourselves.  But welfare is not it.  The term is *General Welfare*.  This does not refer to personal handouts.  It is related to things like infrastructure, roads, water, sewer, etc.  Something that everybody uses and needs.

 

No, we must support our corporate masters...with subsidies and bailouts and endless contracts.. the net result of which is extreme national debt.  

That’s an over simplification of the problem.  And why would the solution be to give Socialism control over it?  It is the cause.  Bailouts and monopolies need to be reined in before they destroy the free market.

 

You worship the very ones you've given control to.  

I don’t worship anyone or anything.  I merely put up with it (that may indeed be just as bad).  But if that is the case, why should I change masters?  Corporate masters are more beneficial that Socialist ones.  I would prefer neither but there is a society that needs to function and we still at least have the illusion of the Constitution.  The consumer controls the marketplace.  If there is anyone to blame, it is the consumer for allowing the corporations to get away with malfeasance. 

 

Extreme wealth for the richest and most powerful is not "economic growth" .   

Actually it is.  Or the very beginnings.  Acquisition of wealth is what builds nations.  Using the term *extreme wealth* is a Socialist trick.  Makes it sound like no one can ever go beyond their station.  Some people are always going to have ungodly more amounts of something than everyone else.  There is nothing wrong with that.  Instead of being jealous of others, it is our place to follow suit and find our own niche.  Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.

 

i'm probably more fiscally conservative than you are ! 

Your words would seem to disagree with you.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tatetopa
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, RavenHawk said:

Correct.  That is a main difference.  A Constitutional Republic guarantees protections of individual rights.  Any other form of government will grant rights.  Is that too subtle? 

Thanks RavenHawk, a good presentation.  Your first statement is the crux of the matter.  It is a wonderful thing and I would be foolish to argue against its  benefits.

From that point forward, it seems all governments exist to formulate laws and set bounds on the acceptable limits in the interactions between individuals, the state and the society.  How to protect the rights of the individual without the country falling into anarchy is a central problem every generation must face.

It seems that socialism or capitalism are two of the philosophies that can shape society interactions within the limits of a government system  There is a spectrum of both in any government.  Only anarchy would support total capitalism.  Only a totalitarian state could support total socialism.  Everybody else lives in a society that is a mix of those things..

For example, people are free to start businesses,  but there are copyright laws and intellectual property laws that are enforced by our government  that keep them from infringing on other people's rights.  It is one of our main beefs with China, they do not seem to respect those rights. It was a bone of contention prior to  the Revolution.  The East India Company had a monopoly granted by the crown that kept others out and competition low.  Currently our Republican government grants similar rights to patent holders and intellectual property right holders to protect them from competition in the field they have developed.  Different in scale but not dissimilar in principle.

Quartering of troops was another bone of contention at that time.  Monopolies are not forbidden by the Constitution, but quartering of troops certainly is mentioned.

Establishing the post office and post roads is definitely in the Constitution.  That is one socialist institution written right into the founding documents.  You might have personal responsibility to pay for the cost of a letter that you mail, but everybody is forced to pay for the post and the roads whether they ever travel or mail a letter.

The ability to tax, and limits to that ability are in the Constitution.  It does not detail how taxes are to be spent.  Airports, ports, highways, and bridges are paid for by taxes and seem purely socialist to me.  Whether you use them or not, you pay for them.

It seems that one of the things you dislike is sharing wealth with the undeserving; that is using taxes to support freeloaders. That is an issue of society and social beliefs, not the Constitution.  All that can be changed without changing a word of the Constitution.  It is just public opinion.

 

Edited by Tatetopa
deleted duplicate phrase
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Farmer77

A hilarious excerpt

Quote

Yes, Trump wants to nuke the weather. By the way, Chris Cillizza of CNN took a stab at attempting to discover whether it would actually work — duh, it’s a catastrophically dumb idea, so dumb that there’s no reason to elaborate on the science of such a cartoony, Sharknado-inspired chunk of horses**t. It's like trying to unravel the physics of Wile E. Coyote’s efforts to kill Roadrunner.

How do we recover from the surreal nightmare of this presidency? It will take some work

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Michelle

Yang wants giant mirrors in space. :P

Andrew Yang, a longshot Democratic candidate campaigning on a platform of universal basic income, Medicare for all, and "human-centered capitalism," believes ramping up clean energy use and curbing carbon emissions isn't enough. He wants the US to take the lead on geoengineering — an umbrella term that encompasses a variety of controversial and not-so-controversial techniques to counteract climate change, not just slow it down.

The term evokes fantastical weather-controlling satellites, giant space mirrors that reflect sunlight, and carbon capture technology that floats around in the atmosphere eating planet-warming carbon. Yang believes these technologies, some of which have yet to be tested in the real world, are far from fantasy.

https://www.businessinsider.com/andrew-yang-thinks-geoengineering-could-lead-to-war-2019-4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
aztek
Posted (edited)

and we thought border walls  was crazy ideal, lol, space mirrors,  lmao.

maybe what  we need to do  is to let nature do what it does and adopt ourselves, that would be much cheaper, and it will actually work

Edited by aztek
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.