EXCUSE ME?!..The OFFICIAL Bernie Sanders For President 2016 Thread

[Rob Roy]

I just gave you an example of how government force was required to accomplish the goal of abolishing slavery

You say you're against government force under all circumstances

You say you're against slavery

So how would we have passed the 13th amendment (abolishing slavery) without the use of government force?

You are holding two contradictory beliefs at the same time

No, government force didn't end slavery. It changed the form of it, that's all. If you'd like I can argue that point easily, but I'll hold off for now,

I am against the initiation of aggression / force, no matter who wields that stick. That doesn't mean I am opposed to defensive force.

I am against slavery, and I am opposed to coercion based governments, since they BOTH use the exact same means to exist. I am an abolitionist, you are not. On one hand you correctly disfavor the use of initiated force to keep people enslaved, but then when it is government using the same exact tactic, you embrace it. You are the one believing in two opposing things at once, not me.


I am not holding two different beliefs. I consistently oppose using a means which arises from coercion. BOTH, slave holders and government use the same means. Your assertion has been refuted.

 

[UncleBuck]

No, government force didn't end slavery.

sweet revisionist history.

now tell us how it was more peaceful when storeowners weren't "raped" and "enslaved" by having to serve black customers.

 

[Padawanbater2]

No, government force didn't end slavery. It changed the form of it, that's all. If you'd like I can argue that point easily, but I'll hold off for now,

I am against the initiation of aggression / force, no matter who wields that stick. That doesn't mean I am opposed to defensive force.

I am against slavery, and I am opposed to coercion based governments, since they BOTH use the exact same means to exist. I am an abolitionist, you are not. On one hand you correctly disfavor the use of initiated force to keep people enslaved, but then when it is government using the same exact tactic, you embrace it. You are the one believing in two opposing things at once, not me.


I am not holding two different beliefs. I consistently oppose using a means which arises from coercion. BOTH, slave holders and government use the same means. Your assertion has been refuted.

Do you support the 13th amendment?

All you need to do is answer with a 'yes' or a 'no', I'm not interested in your reasoning

If you can't answer this question with a simple 'yes' or 'no' answer, that's going to tell me everything I need to know

 

[ttystikk]

Sanders in '16, just to prove to the rest of the world that Americans aren't THAT crazy!

 

[ChesusRice]

Do you support the 13th amendment?

All you need to do is answer with a 'yes' or a 'no', I'm not interested in your reasoning

If you can't answer this question with a simple 'yes' or 'no' answer, that's going to tell me everything I need to know

Good luck

 

[londonfog]

 

[schuylaar]

that's discriminatory..for shame.

 

[Rob Roy]

sweet revisionist history.

now tell us how it was more peaceful when storeowners weren't "raped" and "enslaved" by having to serve black customers.

Can you offer proof that "slavery" really ended and didn't simply morph into a different kind of slavery ?

 

[Rob Roy]

Do you support the 13th amendment?

All you need to do is answer with a 'yes' or a 'no', I'm not interested in your reasoning

If you can't answer this question with a simple 'yes' or 'no' answer, that's going to tell me everything I need to know

I support the idea that there are no masters. Do you?*

Yes or no will tell me all I need to know.



* (you do not, but you THINK that you do )

 

[Padawanbater2]

I support the idea that there are no masters. Do you?*

Yes or no will tell me all I need to know.



* (you do not, but you THINK that you do )

You support the idea that "there are no masters", yet you don't support the 13th amendment because it contradicts your libertarian values. To be clear, this is the full text of the amendment;

Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

Section 2. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

You would rather southern slave owners have the "right" to own slaves than those same slaves be set free by the federal government through force

This is another picture perfect example of why libertarian philosophy is fundamentally flawed

 

[Rob Roy]

You support the idea that "there are no masters", yet you don't support the 13th amendment because it contradicts your libertarian values. To be clear, this is the full text of the amendment;

You would rather southern slave owners have the "right" to own slaves than those same slaves be set free by the federal government through force

This is another picture perfect example of why libertarian philosophy is fundamentally flawed

Again you resort to a false dichotomy and then attempt to frame my thoughts for me.

A person CAN be opposed to slave holders and also to a coercion based government which drafted people into SERVITUDE supposedly to ensure there wasn't servitude.

I would rather there be NO MASTERS and no slaves.

I support the major IDEA embodied in the 13th amendment, but both you and the Federal Government flip flop on that idea from time to time when it is convenient.

Can you honestly say slavery has been eradicated in the USA?

 

[Uncle Ben]

Can you honestly say slavery has been eradicated in the USA?

No it hasn't. Ask a farmer who his master is.

 

[Grandpapy]

Credit Score, He shows no mercy.

 

[UncleBuck]

Can you offer proof that "slavery" really ended and didn't simply morph into a different kind of slavery ?

yes.

it is now illegal to keep people as slaves int he untied states.

do you dispute this? or shall we go into the intricacies of the 13th amendment, and why it is illegal for you to have sex with 10 year old boys?

 

[Rob Roy]

yes.

it is now illegal to keep people as slaves int he untied states.

do you dispute this? or shall we go into the intricacies of the 13th amendment, and why it is illegal for you to have sex with 10 year old boys?

Cough cough military draft


Speaking of illegalities, (I'm not taking your pedo bait here) do you think people in the USA own their own bodies?

You suck at arguing by the way.

 

[Padawanbater2]

 

[ttystikk]

That's just like how it was in Ft Collins, CO, too, a short month ago. This Bernie guy, I hope he sticks around for longer than a weekend or two.

 

[schuylaar]

while Bernie's rally venue is arena Clinton's now been downgraded to hotel,

why was Chuck Todd calling for Bernies concession this morning? he seems to be very agitated that he's still in the race.

 

[Padawanbater2]

while Bernie's rally venue is arena Clinton's now been downgraded to hotel,

why was Chuck Todd calling for Bernies concession this morning? he seems to be very agitated that he's still in the race.

Because Chuck Todd's a bitch

 

[Fogdog]

Bernie is ahead in Wisconsin. Not by enough though. He needs to average 60% of the vote from here on out. The current poll has 50% Bernie-45% Hillary. 5% margin of victory is good but is also going to raise the bar for him in the next primary.