What Bernie says in this speech is the most powerful thing I have ever heard

Comment on that video:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

How wonderful it is to see the rest of the country finally coming to appreciate Bernie. Vermont has progressive folks, and it also has very traditional, very conservative folks, and Bernie routinely gets 85% of our votes BECAUSE HE NEVER LIES TO US, HE NEVER SUGARCOATS. Thank you to all of you out there in the heartland who can see who he is.
 
"I got emotional watching it..." Red Flag #1. People need to feel less often and think more often. Or, in some cases, at all.

Let's continue.

Being against oligarchy is great. Let's look into that word:

oligarchy /ŏl′ĭ-gär″kē, ō′lĭ-/

noun​

  1. Government by a few, especially by a small faction of persons or families.
  2. Those making up such a government.
  3. A state governed by a few persons.
The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, 5th Edition • More at
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Does Sanders include the various layers of unelected bureaucrats within Federal and state governments in that? Because appointees aren't answerable to the voters, making that body of bureaucrats fit the above definition. We'll see if Sanders addresses that, or if he misapplies the definition to 'a group of people the voters approved of but whom I do not." (Spoiler alert: he does not.)

Sanders asks, at timestamp 2:03, "What is it like living paycheck to paycheck?" And well he should ask;
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Like any skilled con artist -- and I'll give the old devil his due, he is a skilled con artist, having been in constant practice at his craft for over fifty years now -- he preys on the emotional malleability of his listeners.

But he's also the man who accepted a nice juicy payday from the DNC to "take a dive" in 2016, and then did it again in 2020.

This just proves that, like the good Socialist he's always been, he's more than happy to spread the wealth -- as long as it's other peoples' wealth.
 
"I got emotional watching it..." Red Flag #1. People need to feel less often and think more often. Or, in some cases, at all.

Let's continue.

Being against oligarchy is great. Let's look into that word:

oligarchy /ŏl′ĭ-gär″kē, ō′lĭ-/

noun​

  1. Government by a few, especially by a small faction of persons or families.
  2. Those making up such a government.
  3. A state governed by a few persons.
The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, 5th Edition • More at
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Does Sanders include the various layers of unelected bureaucrats within Federal and state governments in that? Because appointees aren't answerable to the voters, making that body of bureaucrats fit the above definition. We'll see if Sanders addresses that, or if he misapplies the definition to 'a group of people the voters approved of but whom I do not." (Spoiler alert: he does not.)

Sanders asks, at timestamp 2:03, "What is it like living paycheck to paycheck?" And well he should ask;
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Like any skilled con artist -- and I'll give the old devil his due, he is a skilled con artist, having been in constant practice at his craft for over fifty years now -- he preys on the emotional malleability of his listeners.

But he's also the man who accepted a nice juicy payday from the DNC to "take a dive" in 2016, and then did it again in 2020.

This just proves that, like the good Socialist he's always been, he's more than happy to spread the wealth -- as long as it's other peoples' wealth.
You’re angry, do you want to share your feelings with us?
 
People need to feel less often and think more often. Or, in some cases, at all.
Empathy is the great weakness of western democracy. (Elon Musk 3/25)
Let's look into that word...empathy.





em·pa·thy
/ˈempəTHē/
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

noun

  1. the ability to understand and share the feelings of another.---------
    I mean, actually caring about another person and their situation in life.
    How unJesus.



    Now that is some horrible inhuman and unChristian shit right there.


 
Save that shit, you ain't no fuckin' preacher.
Duh, dotard. But we are a Christian nation after all.
...and I most certainly are a preacher.
I will preach the tenets of true Christianity which is spiritual Liberalism and the antithesis of which is conservatism...aka evil, or in other words (evil is) anti-God/Nature and anti-evolution - It's present personification through MAGA/Trump/materialism in all it's grotesquery.

Here is a good Question:
.Is it possible for a conservative to be a Christian when selfishness is the cornerstone of conservatism?
 
Duh, dotard. But we are a Christian nation after all.
...and I most certainly are a preacher.
I will preach the tenets of true Christianity which is spiritual Liberalism and the antithesis of which is conservatism...aka evil, or in other words (evil is) anti-God/Nature and anti-evolution - It's present personification though MAGA/Trump/materialism in all it's grotesquery.

Here is a good Question:
.Is it possible for a conservative to be a Christian when selfishness is the cornerstone of conservatism?
How much have you given, friend?
 
No, in point of fact, we are not.
And yet it is your heros who say we are and must be.
.Trump, Boobert, MTG et al.
You are welcome to deny it 3 times before the cock crows, but we'll all know you are lying.

PS: Vernal Equinox - I wonder what scent bubble bath jack is taking to celebrate the rebirth of the solar deity?
 
How materialist to want giving quantified. Tisk tisk, Sir Reginald.
I didn't say "how much money," I said "how much."

What we give can mean many things besides the material, Holliday.

You seem to make the mistake of ascribing spiritual values to the the venality of secular politics, and that is kind of stupid, friend.

Just trying to help.
 
I didn't say "how much money," I said "how much."

What we give can mean many things besides the material, Holliday.

You seem to make the mistake of ascribing spiritual values to the the venality of secular politics, and that is kind of stupid, friend.

Just trying to help.
I didn't mention money - that was in your mind.
. I said quantify...by any unit.
2) yes, one can and does found political views in spiritual/metaphysical realities without theocracy,
because theosophy is not religion.

Let me help to show how they do coordinate and the extent to which one may inform the other w/o becoming civil law.

I like this example:
.We got this transgenderism thing...
Technology exists allowing the movement from one gender (physically) to another under maintenance.
. There is no reason, given our form of government, not to allow a person to make a personal decision to take advantage of it. Medical technology allows that it be, and if it is in any sense wrong then it is victimless other than making a poor decision for one's self. That's my political view and is consistent with political Liberalism and self determination.
. However, from what would be considered a spiritual PoV, I would not advise it as a solution to some gender dysphoria. That (to my view) is the same as saying the angels of Karma have no idea what they are up to and put a person in the wrong body....which is utter bullshit. Circumstance, of and in, a life are earned - they are yours to keep, and very much a person's to disregard if foolish enough, but (in my view) better to learn it's lessons, pay debt where found, and advantage blessings where they may be.

There...An Equinoctial offering.
 
Last edited:
First: I have no heroes. Heroes, like any Abrahamic religion or any form of leftist collectivism, are for suckers.

Second: Unlike you, I don't conform what I believe to what others believe based on who they are.
LoLz. Dude - You never had an original thought or perspective in your life. That is quit plain to be seen.
. Shit, You do nothing but quote others...from Hollywood movies no less.
You are the least thoughty person on this message board.

So, for example, you didn't give a clue to your masters here, did you?
like any Abrahamic religion or any form of leftist collectivism,
I mean, didn't you want to mention idoliters and Libertarians, MAGAs or other conservatives?
.Well, no one said you were smart.
 
How materialist to want giving quantified. Tisk tisk, Sir Reginald.
I didn't say "how much money," I said "how much."

What we give can mean many things besides the material, Holliday.

You seem to make the mistake of ascribing spiritual values to the the venality secular politics, and that is kind of stupid, friend.
I didn't mention money - that was in your mind.
. I said quantify...by any unit.
2) yes, one can and does found political views in spiritual/metaphysical realities without theocracy,
because theosophy is not religion.

Let me help to show how they do coordinate and the extent to which one may inform the other w/o becoming civil law.

I like this example:
.We got this transgenderism thing...
Technology exists allowing the movement from one gender (physically) to another under maintenance.
. There is no reason, given our form of government, not to allow a person to make a personal decision to take advantage of it. Medical technology allows that it be, and if it is in any sense wrong then it's is victimless other than making a poor decision for one's self. That's my political view and is consistent with political Liberalism and self determination.
. However, from what would be considered a spiritual PoV, I would not advise it as a solution to some gender dystopia. That (to my view) is the same as saying the angels of Karma have no idea what they are up to and put a person in the wrong body....which is utter bullshit. Circumstance, of and in, a life are earned - they are yours to keep, and very much a person's to disregard if foolish enough, but (in my view) better to learn it's lessons, pay debt where found, and advantage blessings where they may be.

There...An Equinoctial offering.
Those must be good drugs, brother Holliday. ;)

My political view is always consistent. Liberty first, liberty foremost and liberty always. I fully disclaim that I put my liberty first, but the rest of yours I put in a close second.

This is why all Leftist/Collectivist and, yes, Liberal political ideologies are diabolical and evil and generally suck donkey balls because Libtards believe my liberty is subordinate to their fairy tale notions. It is not.

But when I asked about giving, you answered nicely in the penultimate sentence of your post above.
 
Quantifying (as you originally posted) is materialist in itself, Regg - that's the observation I made.
. It's very much related to reward for actions, otherwise what is it balanced against?
I'm not stoned enough to follow this weird logic your tossing out. It's almost as garbled as a Blandy vacaroo.

On a lighter note, the new weather girl on channel five is almost as hot as the one on channel 7.
 
I'm not stoned enough to follow this weird logic your tossing out. It's almost as garbled as a Blandy vacaroo.
Well, you should toke up.
. What I've writ is not unusual.
There is no bigger, or morer in the spirit, Regg. There are no comparative units denoting size or quantity.
To be concerned with how much one has given (whatever exactly that means) is materialist. Why worry over how muchness?
 
Well, you should toke up.
. What I've writ is not unusual.
There is no bigger, or morer in the spirit, Regg. There are no comparative units denoting size or quantity.
To be concerned with how much one has given (whatever exactly that means) is materialist. Why worry over how muchness?
What if I told that I gave everything, and couldn't quantify that giving beyond counting all the days I was able to give, and ever since lamenting every day that I can no longer give?
 
"I got emotional watching it..." Red Flag #1. People need to feel less often and think more often. Or, in some cases, at all.

Let's continue.

Being against oligarchy is great. Let's look into that word:

oligarchy /ŏl′ĭ-gär″kē, ō′lĭ-/

noun​

  1. Government by a few, especially by a small faction of persons or families.
  2. Those making up such a government.
  3. A state governed by a few persons.
The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, 5th Edition • More at
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Does Sanders include the various layers of unelected bureaucrats within Federal and state governments in that? Because appointees aren't answerable to the voters, making that body of bureaucrats fit the above definition. We'll see if Sanders addresses that, or if he misapplies the definition to 'a group of people the voters approved of but whom I do not." (Spoiler alert: he does not.)

Sanders asks, at timestamp 2:03, "What is it like living paycheck to paycheck?" And well he should ask;
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Like any skilled con artist -- and I'll give the old devil his due, he is a skilled con artist, having been in constant practice at his craft for over fifty years now -- he preys on the emotional malleability of his listeners.

But he's also the man who accepted a nice juicy payday from the DNC to "take a dive" in 2016, and then did it again in 2020.

This just proves that, like the good Socialist he's always been, he's more than happy to spread the wealth -- as long as it's other peoples' wealth.
tl;dr. Also, ts;dr (too stupid, didn't read).
 
Comment on that video:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

How wonderful it is to see the rest of the country finally coming to appreciate Bernie. Vermont has progressive folks, and it also has very traditional, very conservative folks, and Bernie routinely gets 85% of our votes BECAUSE HE NEVER LIES TO US, HE NEVER SUGARCOATS. Thank you to all of you out there in the heartland who can see who he is.
Yes, we do.