Moderator: Community Team
AndyDufresne wrote:I endorse this.
--Andy, unregistered monkey, belligerent Star Trek enthusiast, and Futurama-phile
thegreekdog wrote:At my own personal risk* I create this thread to determine, once and for all, whether Phatscotty is a Republican and what kind of Republican he is.
Phatscotty, please answer the following questions:
- Who did you vote for in the 2012 presidential election?
- Who did you vote for in the 2008 presidential election?
- Who did you vote for in the 2004 presidential election?
- At the time, did you support the war in Iraq?
- At the time, did you support the war in Afghanistan?
- Did you support, during the Reagan, Bush Sr., Clinton, and Bush Jr. administrations, the creation and/or maintenance of military presence overseas?
- Are you in favor of the federal bonus depreciation deduction?
- Are you in favor of the federal credit for research and development?
- Are you in favor of making abortion illegal?
- Are you in favor of making English the official language of the United States?
- Are you in favor of making flag burning illegal?
- Are you in favor of making gay marriage illegal?
I may have additional questions for you as you answer these.
Thanks.
TGD, registered Libertarian, tax attorney, and constitutional scholar
* Personal risk may include, but is not limited to, bodily harm, banning, and accusations of trolling, baiting, and flaming.
Lootifer wrote:Tsk tsk TGD, you forget that PS can quite easily, and does as seen above, claim to be a libertarian.
I do doubt his honesty and consistency though. Much like he'd probably lie on a MBTI test to avoid being a F.
thegreekdog wrote:Phatscotty, please answer the following questions:
Phatscotty wrote:thegreekdog wrote:At my own personal risk* I create this thread to determine, once and for all, whether Phatscotty is a Republican and what kind of Republican he is.
Phatscotty, please answer the following questions:
- Who did you vote for in the 2012 presidential election?
- Who did you vote for in the 2008 presidential election?
- Who did you vote for in the 2004 presidential election?
- At the time, did you support the war in Iraq?
- At the time, did you support the war in Afghanistan?
- Did you support, during the Reagan, Bush Sr., Clinton, and Bush Jr. administrations, the creation and/or maintenance of military presence overseas?
- Are you in favor of the federal bonus depreciation deduction?
- Are you in favor of the federal credit for research and development?
- Are you in favor of making abortion illegal?
- Are you in favor of making English the official language of the United States?
- Are you in favor of making flag burning illegal?
- Are you in favor of making gay marriage illegal?
I may have additional questions for you as you answer these.
Thanks.
TGD, registered Libertarian, tax attorney, and constitutional scholar
* Personal risk may include, but is not limited to, bodily harm, banning, and accusations of trolling, baiting, and flaming.
You think I would report you or something?
That's okay. All my life there has been confusion as to exactly where I stand, but like I have said repeatedly, I am a registered independent who is fiscally concerned, and the fiscal concern is growing more and more and time goes by. Independents do not always act a certain way, which is why it is hard for some people who think because I go to the right on one issue, I am chained to the right on every issue. Anyhoo...
2012 - I voted for Romney, specifically against Obama
2008 - Ron Paul
2004 - Ralp Nader
I have never, EVER supported the Iraq war. I was against it even before it started, even when Keith Olberman and Hillary Clitnon were for it. Being against the Iraq war was probably the #1 reason I was demonized as a Liberal from the years 2001-2006.
I supported the Afghanistan actions, but was hoping we would clean house, get the terrorists, and get out. I would have preferred to leave after about 6 months.
I don't think I supported any kind of military presence overseas. Of course each situation is different, and I'm not a pacifist, but my first votes I could cast were for Ross Perot and Jesse Ventura, and their position on the military was a heavy reason for my support, that is that the military is far too stretched out and intervenes way too much in other countries. I am for the strongest of strong defenses, as to me that is the most important function of government, and I think there is a lot of difference between a strong defense and a large military that outspends the rest of the world combined.
I don't know exactly what the federal bonus is, but I can tell you if it costs money that we don't have, I am very likely against it unless there is a specific good and legitimate reason for it's existence.
Federal credit for RnD, I am not dead set against it, but I would much rather prefer the tax system we have were not in place in order for there to be deductions in the first place.
I am not in favor of making abortion illegal.
I think it's important to have an official language. That is not to say that no other language can be spoken, but when it comes to government forms, yes I think they should be in English. We should provide translators and forms written in other languages upon request. However I have not heard a lot of arguments against this or put a lot of thought into it, so I would be open to listen and possibly be persuaded upon discovery of previously unknown details/situations.
I believe burning the flag is a form of free speech, and making it illegal would infringe on the first amendment.
I have a problem with the way your last question is asked. As of right now, gay marriage is not recognized by a majority of states, so I think it's incorrect to ask if I support making it illegal, as that is the way it mostly is. But to skip the re-asking, I can tolerate whichever way the voters decide, so long as the voters get a chance to decide. That is to say, if the voters decide not to change the definition of marriage, I support that. Likewise, if the voters decide to change the definition of marriage, I support that too. The marriage issue is mostly one of process to me, and overall I don't think the government should be involved in marriage in the first place.
waauw wrote:I have to say, even though phatscotty sounds quite extreme in other topics, his answers here are quite similar to my own opinions. I've found some newlyfounded respect for the guy
waauw wrote:I have to say, even though phatscotty sounds quite extreme in other topics, his answers here are quite similar to my own opinions. I've found some newlyfounded respect for the guy
ooge wrote: By that voting record he appears to be in favor of wherever the political winds blow,the mind of a scattered brain individual with no core principles.reminds me of a fan of the New York Yankees living in Boston going to Red Sox games,He is not really a Fan of the Yankees, he just likes getting all the negative attention.
natty_dread wrote:Do ponies have sex?
(proud member of the Occasionally Wrongly Banned)Army of GOD wrote:the term heterosexual is offensive. I prefer to be called "normal"
john9blue wrote:ITT are a bunch of douchebags.
if you think scotty is a liar here about his beliefs, then call him out on it when he tries to argue against them in another thread.
john9blue wrote:wait nvm, it's easier to stick your head in the sand and pretend that people you don't agree with are all dishonest scumbags.
john9blue wrote:bunch of fucking morons. i don't often defend scotty, but the level of idiocy here is ridiculous.
john9blue wrote:ITT are a bunch of douchebags.
if you think scotty is a liar here about his beliefs, then call him out on it when he tries to argue against them in another thread.
wait nvm, it's easier to stick your head in the sand and pretend that people you don't agree with are all dishonest scumbags.
bunch of fucking morons. i don't often defend scotty, but the level of idiocy here is ridiculous.
also, this made me laugh:
because it's coming from someone so thoroughly indoctrinated and so predictable that i could probably write a computer program to make their posts for them. i can see why you'd be against individual thought. get back in line soldier!
Woodruff wrote:john9blue wrote:ITT are a bunch of douchebags.
if you think scotty is a liar here about his beliefs, then call him out on it when he tries to argue against them in another thread.
I do. All the time.john9blue wrote:wait nvm, it's easier to stick your head in the sand and pretend that people you don't agree with are all dishonest scumbags.
Occasionally, there are people who are dishonest scumbags.john9blue wrote:bunch of fucking morons. i don't often defend scotty, but the level of idiocy here is ridiculous.
Actually, you do. Frequently.
john9blue wrote:ITT are a bunch of douchebags.
if you think scotty is a liar here about his beliefs, then call him out on it when he tries to argue against them in another thread.
wait nvm, it's easier to stick your head in the sand and pretend that people you don't agree with are all dishonest scumbags.
bunch of fucking morons. i don't often defend scotty, but the level of idiocy here is ridiculous.
Phatscotty wrote:thegreekdog wrote:At my own personal risk* I create this thread to determine, once and for all, whether Phatscotty is a Republican and what kind of Republican he is.
Phatscotty, please answer the following questions:
- Who did you vote for in the 2012 presidential election?
- Who did you vote for in the 2008 presidential election?
- Who did you vote for in the 2004 presidential election?
- At the time, did you support the war in Iraq?
- At the time, did you support the war in Afghanistan?
- Did you support, during the Reagan, Bush Sr., Clinton, and Bush Jr. administrations, the creation and/or maintenance of military presence overseas?
- Are you in favor of the federal bonus depreciation deduction?
- Are you in favor of the federal credit for research and development?
- Are you in favor of making abortion illegal?
- Are you in favor of making English the official language of the United States?
- Are you in favor of making flag burning illegal?
- Are you in favor of making gay marriage illegal?
I may have additional questions for you as you answer these.
Thanks.
TGD, registered Libertarian, tax attorney, and constitutional scholar
* Personal risk may include, but is not limited to, bodily harm, banning, and accusations of trolling, baiting, and flaming.
You think I would report you or something?
That's okay. All my life there has been confusion as to exactly where I stand, but like I have said repeatedly, I am a registered independent who is fiscally concerned, and the fiscal concern is growing more and more and time goes by. Independents do not always act a certain way, which is why it is hard for some people who think because I go to the right on one issue, I am chained to the right on every issue. Anyhoo...
2012 - I voted for Romney, specifically against Obama
2008 - Ron Paul
2004 - Ralp Nader
I have never, EVER supported the Iraq war. I was against it even before it started, even when Keith Olberman and Hillary Clitnon were for it. Being against the Iraq war was probably the #1 reason I was demonized as a Liberal from the years 2001-2006.
I supported the Afghanistan actions, but was hoping we would clean house, get the terrorists, and get out. I would have preferred to leave after about 6 months.
I don't think I supported any kind of military presence overseas. Of course each situation is different, and I'm not a pacifist, but my first votes I could cast were for Ross Perot and Jesse Ventura, and their position on the military was a heavy reason for my support, that is that the military is far too stretched out and intervenes way too much in other countries. I am for the strongest of strong defenses, as to me that is the most important function of government, and I think there is a lot of difference between a strong defense and a large military that outspends the rest of the world combined.
I don't know exactly what the federal bonus is, but I can tell you if it costs money that we don't have, I am very likely against it unless there is a specific good and legitimate reason for it's existence.
Federal credit for RnD, I am not dead set against it, but I would much rather prefer the tax system we have were not in place in order for there to be deductions in the first place.
I am not in favor of making abortion illegal.
I think it's important to have an official language. That is not to say that no other language can be spoken, but when it comes to government forms, yes I think they should be in English. We should provide translators and forms written in other languages upon request. However I have not heard a lot of arguments against this or put a lot of thought into it, so I would be open to listen and possibly be persuaded upon discovery of previously unknown details/situations.
I believe burning the flag is a form of free speech, and making it illegal would infringe on the first amendment.
I have a problem with the way your last question is asked. As of right now, gay marriage is not recognized by a majority of states, so I think it's incorrect to ask if I support making it illegal, as that is the way it mostly is. But to skip the re-asking, I can tolerate whichever way the voters decide, so long as the voters get a chance to decide. That is to say, if the voters decide not to change the definition of marriage, I support that. Likewise, if the voters decide to change the definition of marriage, I support that too. The marriage issue is mostly one of process to me, and overall I don't think the government should be involved in marriage in the first place.
john9blue wrote:ITT are a bunch of douchebags.
if you think scotty is a liar here about his beliefs, then call him out on it when he tries to argue against them in another thread.
wait nvm, it's easier to stick your head in the sand and pretend that people you don't agree with are all dishonest scumbags.
bunch of fucking morons. i don't often defend scotty, but the level of idiocy here is ridiculous.
also, this made me laugh:ooge wrote: By that voting record he appears to be in favor of wherever the political winds blow,the mind of a scattered brain individual with no core principles.reminds me of a fan of the New York Yankees living in Boston going to Red Sox games,He is not really a Fan of the Yankees, he just likes getting all the negative attention.
because it's coming from someone so thoroughly indoctrinated and so predictable that i could probably write a computer program to make their posts for them. i can see why you'd be against individual thought. get back in line soldier!
Phatscotty wrote:2004 - Ralp Nader
Phatscotty wrote:In fact toxification is the goal of posters like Woodruff. Greekdog asks me some questions, I answer them the exact same way I have always answered them, Woodruff and Co. come in and call me a liar and a bunch of other names and make the entire conversation toxic, and nobody wants to touch it. Brilliant, no. Effective, yes. Honorable, no. Troll, yes.
Phatscotty wrote:But here we are, a decade later...what I have found is that those who were the most vocal in calling me a barbarian, an America hater, an evil Liberal
Phatscotty wrote:But all I can do is try to help.
Phatscotty wrote:I care that in the future, you remember me and what I and others have said, so you can look at recent history for yourselves, and make the correct decision at the correct time, in a world saturated with lies and disinformation and elitist/establishment backed narrative control at every level.
/ wrote:Phatscotty wrote:2004 - Ralp Nader
Wow, that's kind of surprising, what did you like about Nader?
I would have thought several of his ideals would be deal breakers for you, like his single payer universal health care plan, $10 living wage advocacy, progressive taxation advocacy, or anti-economic globalization advocacy.
Lootifer wrote:I almost suspect you of trolling here.
Firstly I said I questioned his honesty (likewise BBS gave reasons why he would be dishonest and opted on that likelihood) I didnt openly call him a "dishonest scumbag"*.
Secondly PS is very smart in that he seldom lets his core ideals show (similar to you but less subtle); for example he says he is not against specific aspects of the laws governing homosexual behavior, but often eludes to a predicted deterioration of society if these laws are altered in favor of homosexuals. I try to call him out when he does this but it is not often successful (see my thread on education for an example of this).
Thirdly there's even a nifty example of it in here. He was careful to quickly assume that he was also not a libertarian, doing so prevents this being used against him in further arguments. If he's not guilty of dishonesty/consistency then he's certainly guilty of opacity/political maneuvering (lol on an anonymous forum no less!) which I dislike with equal fervor.
* yes yes, plenty of irony here, but get over it.
AAFitz wrote:It is very cool to see you having answered these questions honestly. I have a little more respect for you, not that I think that matters to you one iota.
I also think it to some degree proves that you are more or less a reasonable person, that enjoys making....sensationalized claims and creating drama...or, for lack of a better word...a troll. But that is based on the entire other body of your "work" in CC, and not on this.
Also, personally, I enjoyed watching you squirm on that last question, but that is my failing, not yours.
natty_dread wrote:Do ponies have sex?
(proud member of the Occasionally Wrongly Banned)Army of GOD wrote:the term heterosexual is offensive. I prefer to be called "normal"
/ wrote:Phatscotty wrote:2004 - Ralp Nader
Wow, that's kind of surprising, what did you like about Nader?
Return to Practical Explanation about Next Life,
Users browsing this forum: No registered users