• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

796 Good


About twylyght

  • Rank
    The picture of how I care
  • Birthday 08/25/1973

Profile Information

  • Gender


  • Location
    The upstairs bedroom

Recent Profile Visitors

6,434 profile views
  1. Clinton 'Cash for Favor' Foundation

    Assuming and deflecting so soon?
  2. Clinton 'Cash for Favor' Foundation

    Good job at picking and choosing.... as per the usual And that talking out both sides of your mouth? You're doing it yet again... and you've got some Democrat sticking to your face, still
  3. Clinton 'Cash for Favor' Foundation

    And you're full-throatedly backing Clinton without the least bit of shame. At exactly what point should we be taking you seriously?
  4. Clinton 'Cash for Favor' Foundation

    Spot on.... all of it. Just as the GOP is not representative of its constituents, neither is the Democrat Party. It is a shame that we had to get to this point just to get a significant portion of the populace to see this. Even now, it still won't be enough. The consequences of buying into this kind of fiscal recklessness are coming. There is no amount of political pandering that will stave it off now. There is no one coming to save us. Look around you. What we see is what we've got to pull ourselves out this garbage. Strap up Nancy boys... the coming decades are going to seriously suck. We can either start to deal with it on our terms, or we can try to ride it out and deal with it on life's terms.
  5. Clinton 'Cash for Favor' Foundation

    Conflicts of national interest while serving as SoS? Say it isnt so!
  6. Clinton 'Cash for Favor' Foundation

    Ger ready to be summarily dismissed as conspiracy theorists
  7. How the Left wins it for the Right

    Googy's favorite tactic.... six degrees of separation and therefore guilt by association no matter how convoluted
  8. How the Left wins it for the Right

    Looks like a thread about "how to talk out both sides of your mouth 101" Then again, that could be every thread for a lot of you trolls
  9. Trump vs. Hillary

    So... did you consider it a conflict of interest when Halliburton was brought in for extensive clean up projects following the 2nd Iraq war?
  10. Trump vs. Hillary

    If Clinton's job as Sec of State was to line her pockets, then yes... she did a helluva job
  11. Whatever label one wishes to bestow in an effort to understand or misconstrue, my root belief is pretty straight forward. The job of government is not to make everyone moral, but to protect its citizens' life,liberty and property. Objective: Maximum freedom for everyone. This is the reason for the laws to exist. If they don't protect a citizen's life, liberty or property, then why does this law exist? Hence, the notion of a law existing for the benefit to protect someone from themselves is clearly outside the purview of governmental directives. Application: If a law meets the above mission statement objective(s), we need to assess if it works. If a law doesn't work or is even counter to its purpose, then it needs to be stricken from the books. The caveats come in with respect to legal citizenry and capacity for consent: If someone is not a citizen, they may have input to legal citizens for counsel, but shouldn't have a vote in the passage/upholding/overturning of laws. If someone has lost their citizenship due to laws that have nothing to do with protecting life, liberty and property, then their citizenship status was wrongfully taken from them and their legal status should be reinstated immediately. Also, the reality is that children, disabled, and elderly often display radically variant capacities for understanding and consent. This is where any myriad of issues arise as these are standards that are problematic to quantify. Lifetimes of discussion have been devoted to identifying deviant behavior, whether it is problematic, and how to deal with it. Entire genres of science fiction have delved deeply into how the forces of order come at the cost of the individual and the psyche of free-thinking suffers at the imposition of a collective (and sometimes singular) will. It's a bulletin point run of my philosophical underpinnings, but it underlies my views in how government should run. This is not to say that this supplants my personal belief system. I definitely have a code for what is moral and the standards by which I live my own life. My vision of government would mandate that my personal views are not imposed on anyone else (especially against their will). Hence, maximum freedom over my own life while not limiting the maximum freedom of those around me.
  12. Hrm... let's see. More government voted in with the intention of reigning in corporate corruption. What could possibly go wrong?
  13. If the federal government compels us to do something, can we turn to a different federal government? If a business decides to gouge their clientele, can we turn to a different business? If a business decides to rig the game by effectively becoming the only player in the game, do they not turn to government to expedite this process? If a business fails spectacularly can they now look to their political friends to bail them out with confiscated public funds (presently collected or promised future "revenue")? If a business wants guaranteed money towards their bottom line can they seek it out through confiscated funds in the form of subsidies and tax breaks? Why does SAS have the best and brightest working for them? Is this the result of government or free market principles? This isn't about a faith in big business. This is about understanding human nature working in a system of legitimate competition. This is about a form of governance that is actually accountable to its citizens due to physical proximity and opening the door to public policy making. The answer isn't more centralized government and faith in a profession that naturally draws more sophisticated sociopaths to it. The system for which I am advocating isn't perfect, but it is more realistic that this hope that proven sociopaths will somehow unilaterally find morality for the greater good.
  14. John Miller

    Fair enough. And to be crystal clear, Donald Trump telling Kim to go fug himself wouldn't effectively be worse than any diplomacy that the US has employed. It certainly wouldn't help. It definitely reeks of a lack of class. But the result is still a turd.