If he defended his tattoo and/or kept it, fuck him and he can get the fuck out of the party. No space for that bullshit.
However, this is certainly an example of a person who is trying to be a Democratic political primary candidate with a questionable background on racial topics. Who received enough backlash to undergo a procedure to remove his tattoo, because he knew he wouldn’t get elected with it.
= + 1
(If it’s not obvious why this is a horrifying politician statement, then no meaningful conversation about it is possible.)
Horrifying? It’s just a fundamental difference between Democrats that will acknowledge they want to use government to solve problems and Republicans that pretend to not want that, but go ahead and do it anyway, but for different problems they want to solve.
The clause, “no concern too small for it to care about” strikes right at the heart of what my inner libertarian is concerned about (not that the R’s are any better in that regard these days than the D’s).
This.
Government and the individual should ultimately be a partnership in bettering society, not one dominating and crushing dissent in the other. Ds like Mamdani want too much government, while your typical MAGA R wants too much individual. I guess in that regard, it’s possible to distinguish between microsocialism and macrosocialism.
Microsocialism would = targeted programs that are meant to uplift people who genuinely need an assist until they can get back to standing on their own.
Macrosocialism would = the destructive force I mentioned earlier, like your Venezuelas and Chinas and Cubas, where human nature corrupts any good that might have been accomplished and turns it into a necessarily violent quest for infinite power. (“Necessarily” because the only way for macrosocialism to work is with 100% buy-in, and the only way to get 100% buy-in is by force.)
No, I agree with MS on this one. Unfortunately MAGA wants too much government control as well. They are not the libertarian R brand in the least.
My biggest problem with Libertarianism is it seems to boil down to the simple philosophy of “F-U Igot mine and the governments only job is to see that I keep it.”
My unemployed libertarian friend was complaining about the state’s stingy UE benefits and how screwed up hiring has become in his field. .
I was nice and let this one go, but FFS…
Cool.
Can’t see it, cuz net nanny.
She has one of those meme signs where she sits behind a table -
Mike Johnson is starving families and gutting healthcare to cover up the Epstien files. - Change my mind.
I could see how that statement could be seen as problematic by either side making that comment depending on how you view it.
That said much of what Faux News is calling radical communism is commonplace in parts of Europe and I haven’t seen them collapse yet.
The reason I put weasel words around my semi-libertarianism is that libertarianism requires certain sadly unrealistic things to be viable in practice.
One of those things is that people be decent to one another. If you aren’t going to have social safety nets, you need people to be responsible and charitable…and that’s not what happens in reality.
Nevertheless, my own political philosophy has “I want the government to generally stay the eff out of my life” as a starting point…and that quote conflicts with that principle.
(Yes, interaction with the government is necessary and inevitable, but I prefer that it be no more than is really needed…)
So, she is appropriating from Charlie Kirk’s culture? HOW DARE SHE!!!
Did she also misspell “Epstein”?
Asking for a friend.
Maybe it was meant as a Kirk tribute.
And no the Epstein/Epstien typo is all mine.
OTOH, you could say this was as opposed to “we really just don’t GAF”
Isn’t he proposing socialistic policies rather than communism?
I find a lot of Libertarians are more along the lines of government needs to stay out of my life, but should definitely regulate the lives/actions of people doing things I don’t like.
His policies from what I’ve seen, heard and read all sound fairly well in line with European Socialistic policies. To some thats communism, to others it’s expanding social safety nets. Depends on who you talk to I suppose.
I wish him success as I’m a fan of a number of his policy agenda items but I’m skeptical of him being able to keep most of his campaign promises and that could lead to a back lash in the next election. But I don’t expect New York City to descend into a Cuba, USSR or China like system of government during his time in office which is what I generally associate communistic governments if that’s what you mean.
Yep. That’s approximately why I’ve been increasingly uncomfortable with the label.
Sadly, I haven’t found a better one.