I think Portland is still a beautiful city to visit for a weekend and eat the food..buy some books..check out some art..I have friends who have lived in the city for 30 years and still love it today. Too much city for my taste but most are.
Nah, biology's not my field. Yeah, which is why I thought it was strange that you brought up parents at all. The Constitution gives us our rights within this society, but unless you're lumping the Constitution into "the government" and saying the government created us, I have to say that I'm not quite getting your initial point! And if you consider us to be government creations--well, that's actually a really interesting point and I'd love to hear more.
LOL at Cali and their 4-8 months delays in taxpayer refunds. Had numerous family and friends freaking out during that time frame. Or the rolling blackouts. Or the drought. Mo' money, mo' problems. The greater the gains, the bigger the losses. . The higher the ups, the lower the downs.
Yes, I can see the struggle. Not quite right. A great man told us how we acquired our rights; "they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness..." He then went on to tell us how we secure those rights; "That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men..." So after fighting the battles necessary, they did indeed institute our government, including the Constitution and the bill of rights to codify for all to see, written by men, the government is not the giver or the creator of rights. It is to provide us with security so that we may keep our rights. They are not negotiable, they are our endowment to be protected and our government has agreed. The government is not a creator of men, rights, or a damn thing. At best it can only help us keep rights, so that we may create a few things ourselves.
As you pointed out, though, our parents don't endow us with rights, so how great could this man be, having made a mistake like that?
Rolling blackouts were planned by utility companies. They are thankfully in the past. So is drought, at least for now. California is prosperous. Not perfect but prosperous. Kansas, the conservative dream state, cut taxes on the rich and corporations and slashes services, of course restricted women and voting rights and instead of the expected miracle are in severe crisis. To the point where courts have ordered them to find more funds for schools because the school funding is so low it does not meet legal requirements. Their solution is to replace the justices on the state supreme court, not fund schools. You know, for me, if my income is cut my revenue does not increase but there is this persistent conservative myth that if you cut taxes on rich people somehow revenue will increase! Never has. But rich people love it.
Neither are the people bashing California. The beauty of this forum is that no one is biased--everyone else is.
At least I was objective in my ranting. I acknowledge that there are some good things about California, and much of it is beautiful. But trying to compare a barren Plain State to that of the 6th largest economy in the world is not just asinine, but defies logic and reason as well. Add in the typical Leftist rants against corporations, their made-up lies about conservatives hating women, and other Leftist bullshit, and it's no wonder they lost this election. I voted for Trump, but I don't like him, and I don't follow him blindly. THAT is being objective.
Ha, you didn't acknowledge anything good about California socially or politically. I agree that you're objective about landscaping. I'm sure crandc could find some things in Kansas' landmass physically attractive. No one on this board is anything close to objective politically or socially and no one should pretend otherwise. Also, you find what crandc said about Kansas to be "Leftist bullshit" because of your political biases. It's fine to have them, just don't pretend that your opinions are objective. No one's are.
The problem with your argument, however, is trying to suggest that one is no more objective than the other. I disagree. When you have the majority of the Left who think that Trump is going to get us into a nuclear war, round up gays and torture them, lynch black people, and then grab every woman he meets by the pussy.....I'm sorry, but there's simply no comparing this kind of "objective" mentality against that of the Right. Do I have my biases? Sure, you bet I do. But I also use logic and reason to form my opinions and beliefs. The Left uses emotion instead of logic and reason to form their opinions, and uses click-bait articles and cherry-picked clips from the Huffington Post and Twitter to argue statistics and facts. And then tries to convince others that what they're saying is true based on their assumptions of what Trump means, instead of what he actually says. That tells you all you need to know.
First of all, that's not the "majority of the left." Your biases lead you to believe it's the majority. And it's no different than all the conservatives who insisted Obama was a secret Muslim, hated America, wanted to impose Sharia law in the US, had hidden allegiance to ISIS and other terrorists, etc. The fact that you think conservatives use logic and liberals use emotion and no logic or reason is purely due to your biases. You may be shocked to know that liberals consider conservatives to be the ignorant ones who ignore facts, science and logic. Cherry-picked clips from Breitbart, FOX News, Drudge Report, Infowars? All conservative! You're not more objective, nor are conservatives. That's just an image you like to believe about yourself and "your side," because it makes you feel better and superior. The same smug superiority you probably detest in liberals. Odd, that.
So I'm supposed to take the rantings of someone who's admittedly not objective....about my lack of objectivity? Right. Okay. I'm going back to arguing against Trump's use of Twitter on a gun forum. And I never thought I'd have to be the voice of reason on a forum that I've been with for 13 years. But there you go.
I never really expected you to change your mind--I was just noting that you embody the same emotional lack of objectivity and smug sense of self-satisfaction that you perceive in liberals. You can continue with that. It adds color to the forum. (Also, terming other people's posts you disagree with "rants" and your own posts "the voice of reason" is a pretty big tell about how little perspective or objectivity you have. It's also pretty emotionally driven terminology!)
But we've already established, by your own admission, that you aren't objective. So why should I listen to you about anything? Sorry, but you kind of defeated yourself there.
Pretending that you're objective or perfect or any other impossible superlative doesn't suddenly make your argument stronger. It makes it weaker, because you're admitting that you're delusional. Your argument here is, "You just admitted you're not delusional, so you lose the argument! I'm still delusional, that makes me the winner."
Where have I said that I'm delusional? All I said was the Left uses emotion and cherry-picked assumptions based on what they believe Trump means, rather than what he actually says, to form their supposed "objectivity". And it's obvious. You only need to look at Rasta, Dviss, crandc, and other Liberals posts on here to see this. They ACTUALLY BELIEVE the things I listed above, the first time I explained the difference between the two. They have OPENLY ADMITTED this. Now, go try and find a conservative on this forum who thinks that Obama was a Muslim born in Kenya. I don't even think @blue32 believes that, and I'm doubtful that @MarAzul does either. That's the difference between the objectivity of the two. Now, you can stomp your feet like a child over this issue, but I'm afraid that I actually have the facts here to back this up. I mean, it's right there in what they post!
