Senate votes 98-2 to increase sanctions on Russia

A big FU to Russia and the traitors in our government.

And that piece-of-shit Rand Paul was one of the two NO votes.

Ya... cause a guy that doesn't want to use govt to force you to do anything is sooo scary... lol.

I would need to see his logic and why he voted no to condemn him. I do not mind principled senators protesting for a good cause, but if it is simply to build this sales campaign for one's self.......sorry that is some low chit.

PkrBum wrote:Ya... cause a guy that doesn't want to use govt to force you to do anything is sooo scary... lol.

Yeah, that darn government forcing me to drive on one side of the road is an outrage! That's what governance is, you dumb shit--getting people to agree on a set of rules and then following them even if you disagree with them.

You're just a shitty citizen who doesn't want to go along with anything he disagrees with. All you ever do is bitch about stuff, you never propose any solutions.

Any jackass can kick a barn down, it takes people working together to build one.

A limited govt provides general welfare... meaning a service to all. Just like your road and the rules.

Assigning me positions to build your argument is lame. A sure sign of a limited intellect.

Take a nap or something... the terrible two routine is old.

PkrBum wrote:A limited govt provides general welfare... meaning a service to all. Just like your road and the rules.

Your historical ignorance is astonishing. I'm gonna milk the rules-of-the-road metaphor a little more, so pay attention.

At the turn of the last century, when automobiles were just coming into use, there were NO rules of the road. Horse-drawn vehicles could drive on what ever side of the road they chose. There were conventions but they hadn't been formalized into regulations.

When automobiles started becoming popular, the same conventions applied to them. As cars became more and more popular, local governments decided they had to write some rules. We couldn't have the damn cars just driving and parking wherever they wanted--it was dangerous and inconvenient for pedestrians and horses.

As cars became almost ubiquitous, the rules became more and more complex. Then the manufacturers had to react by, for instance, putting the steering wheel on the same side on every brand of car.

Then the government had to create some rules like indicating turns and the manufacturers had to respond to that. The insurance companies started to get involved and they had to have some say in the rules as well as the manufacture of the automobiles. The oil companies wanted some cooperation from the manufacturers about the clearances and specifications of the engines. Then the government had to regulate the safety issues involved in dispensing gasoline.

Do you get it? Everything gets more and more complex as populations grow and densities increase. This is what government does, it reacts to this increasing complexity as best it can, but there's no going back to some Mayberry-Norman Rockwell past. Societies invariable become more and more complex or they die. We can either adapt to the changes or end up like Mayan temples, being eaten by the jungle.

Your comments seem to indicate you've never read a goddamn word of history or, in the unlikely event you have, you didn't grasp the obvious lessons. Wise the fuck up.

del.capslock wrote:

PkrBum wrote:A limited govt provides general welfare... meaning a service to all. Just like your road and the rules.

Your historical ignorance is astonishing. I'm gonna milk the rules-of-the-road metaphor a little more, so pay attention.

At the turn of the last century, when automobiles were just coming into use, there were NO rules of the road. Horse-drawn vehicles could drive on what ever side of the road they chose. There were conventions but they hadn't been formalized into regulations.

When automobiles started becoming popular, the same conventions applied to them. As cars became more and more popular, local governments decided they had to write some rules. We couldn't have the damn cars just driving and parking wherever they wanted--it was dangerous and inconvenient for pedestrians and horses.

As cars became almost ubiquitous, the rules became more and more complex. Then the manufacturers had to react by, for instance, putting the steering wheel on the same side on every brand of car.

Then the government had to create some rules like indicating turns and the manufacturers had to respond to that. The insurance companies started to get involved and they had to have some say in the rules as well as the manufacture of the automobiles. The oil companies wanted some cooperation from the manufacturers about the clearances and specifications of the engines. Then the government had to regulate the safety issues involved in dispensing gasoline.

Do you get it? Everything gets more and more complex as populations grow and densities increase. This is what government does, it reacts to this increasing complexity as best it can, but there's no going back to some Mayberry-Norman Rockwell past. Societies invariable become more and more complex or they die. We can either adapt to the changes or end up like Mayan temples, being eaten by the jungle.

Your comments seem to indicate you've never read a goddamn word of history or, in the unlikely event you have, you didn't grasp the obvious lessons. Wise the fuck up.

Well said, del.

Sooo... were there no roads before govt? Good to know... thanks.

PkrBum wrote: Sooo... were there no roads before govt? Good to know... thanks.

At no point did I say anything even remotely resembling the idea that there were no roads before government, but this is an excellent example of how deranged your mental processes are.

You really do need some help, you know.

del.capslock wrote:You really do need some help, you know.

Understatement of the month about our resident intransigent hard-head.