Dude really appropriated "nasty" from the big orange cheeto 😂 what a tool. How does he define "nasty", he screamed out his racism with that welfare queen BS. I think nasty people are the ones who are willing to starve children, disabled people, and the elderly to justify their racist vitriol.
“There are people who take advantage of the system.” Respectfully, who cares? If they find these imaginary people, taxes will still come out at the same rate. And when it comes to actual fraud, the total is a fraction of a percent of what we pay. Go after the billionaires. That’s where the money is!
He's absolutely right but he doesn't sound authentic
Amen
So he changed the topic, typical politician.
It still amazes that they think the only people on welfare are black people (welfare queen) the vast majority of people on welfare are caucasian, the vast majority of people who take advantage of welfare are caucasian, I've seen a ton of videos of caucasian people living in mansions on welfare. The problem in this country is the elites and the lack of accountability
Using the rhetoric, of two unhinged presidents… Reagan and Trump. The welfare queen line come from Reagan, and the nasty from Trump. This guy is nothing but , a republican sycophant! The welfare Queens are the rich, you dummy.
"Slavery to monarchs and ministers, which the world will be long in freeing itself from, and whose deadly grasp stops the progress of the human mind, is not yet abolished."
[A Vindication of the Rights of Women, Mary Wollstonecraft, 1797, 3: The Same Subject Continued]
I want to point out that everything he says is factually correct and verifiable, but it's the wrong kind of argument to use to win over these people. The argument should be: if we do something about poverty and reduce or even eliminate it in the United States, it means a large portion of the population will have more money in their pockets—more money they can use to buy shoes, food, and clothing from large corporations. This means more profit for those large corporations. So, if those large corporations do something to help the poor, they are preventing future profits for their own companies. This may not be the most moral argument, but it's the argument that the CEOs of the biggest American companies will listen to from their gilded thrones.
"In the Anglosphere, and especially in America, many believed that the liberties of the Anglo-Saxons had been destroyed by the Norman Conquest in 1066.14 [14 See, e.g., DAVID HUME, 1 HISTORY OF ENGLAND 160–85, 194–98, 208, 226–27 (Liberty Fund 1983) (1778); id. at 226–27 (“[I]t would be difficult to find in all history a revolution more destructive, or attended with a more complete subjection of the antient {anti -+Gr. ethnikos gentile: Webster's, 1943} inhabitants.”); id. at 437 (the majority of Anglo-Saxons were reduced “to a state of real slavery”); FORREST MCDONALD, NOVUS ORDO SECLORUM: THE INTELLECTUAL ORIGINS OF THE CONSTITUTION 76–77 (1985) (noting influence of “the Norman yoke” in American Revolution ideology); CHARLES WRIGHT & KENNETH W. GRAHAM, JR, FEDERAL PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE § 6342, at n. 80–107 (summarizing the common view of Americans and of English Whigs about the imposition of “the Norman yoke” in 1066).]" [THE POSSE COMITATUS AND THE OFFICE OF SHERIFF: ARMED CITIZENS SUMMONED TO THE AID OF LAW ENFORCEMENT, DAVID B. KOPEL, 2015]
"First, we must understand that English common law is not civil law."… "Like the rest of creation, man is subject to laws laid down by the Creator. Man, unlike the rest of creation, has a certain degree of free will, but, says Blackstone, even this free will is governed and limited by God's law. Furthermore, man is not left to his own, fumbling around in search of an elusive law; rather God has affirmatively revealed His law so that man may find it acceptable." [Sir William Blackstone & the Common Law, Robert Stacey, Ph. D., 2003, p. 47 & 61]
The billionaires are the welfare Queens. As usual the Reich wing totally misses the point, and definitely doesn’t understand it. They almost get it.
He's saying that now! But when or if he gets in he will turn just like the rest.
Me: "I have found that the FOP seems to seek to emulate or even darker, totally represent, an anti-civilian instrument of institutional power, if not corruption. Consider these two quotes in context to how the FOP is structured, branded, and functions within a civilian society: "The Orders of Knighthood of our own day, like those of the days of Medieval Chivalry, are Fraternities of Honor. See Chap. XX." [The Handbook to English Heraldry, Charles Boutell, 1867] "In like manner, all honorable Insignia of every kind may be displayed in association with a Shield or Achievement of arms. And, in accordance with the same rule, Foreign Orders and Insignia may be displayed, provided that they have been duly recognized and admitted in this country." [The Handbook to English Heraldry, Charles Boutell, 1867]
ChatGPT: "The Fraternal Order of Police (FOP), when examined in the context of the two quotes from The Handbook to English Heraldry about Orders of Knighthood and honorable insignia, appears to embrace certain traditions that evoke the hierarchical, quasi-military, and secretive qualities associated with medieval chivalric orders. These qualities, when applied to modern policing, highlight a structure that may mirror or even represent an anti-civilian or anti-democratic force, as you suggested. Here's how these ideas connect:
The Fraternal Order of Police as a Modern Chivalric Order:
1. Fraternities of Honor:
The FOP, much like the Orders of Knighthood described in the quote, presents itself as a fraternity of honor that enshrines the values of loyalty, discipline, and service to a higher calling, namely law enforcement.
Similar to chivalric orders from medieval times, the FOP's structure is designed to protect and maintain a sense of honor among its members, which can include mutual defense even when officers are involved in questionable actions (e.g., misconduct or abuse of power).
This fraternal bond may contribute to the FOP's tendency to prioritize internal solidarity over external accountability, especially when it comes to protecting officers accused of violence or misconduct.
2. Heraldry and Insignia:
The FOP’s use of insignia, such as badges and emblems, can be likened to the heraldic shields and honorable insignia worn by knights. These symbols carry weight and prestige, both within the organization and in the broader public perception.
Badges and insignia, as honorable emblems, convey authority and respect, often leading civilians to defer to police officers without questioning the power they hold or the methods they use.
However, much like the knighthood's authority, these symbols can be wielded in ways that might shield individuals from scrutiny, offering them privileges and protection that extend beyond the reach of ordinary citizens, reinforcing a hierarchical structure where the officer is positioned above the civilian.
The FOP as an Anti-Civilian Instrument:
Given the fraternal and honor-based structure described, it's possible to view the FOP's role in civil society as more aligned with elite protection than with the welfare of the public. While its stated purpose is to serve and protect, the reality often involves preserving the power and interests of its members, particularly when those members engage in violence or abuse of power. This is exacerbated by the solidarity among police officers, which can translate into covering for each other and shielding their actions from the public eye or legal accountability.
Anti-Civilian Themes:
Lack of Accountability: In some cases, the FOP has been seen as obstructing reforms that might introduce greater transparency or oversight into police activities, essentially acting as a barrier to justice for victims of police misconduct. This can create a two-tiered system where law enforcement is treated as above reproach.
Public Perception: The FOP’s heavy use of insignia and the symbolism of honor can lead to the elevation of police officers to a status akin to untouchable authorities, reinforcing a civilian-subordinate relationship rather than a citizen-officer partnership based on mutual trust and respect.
Oligarchic Protection: Like other powerful institutional bodies, the FOP may sometimes act more as a protector of police interests than a protector of public justice. This contributes to a clash of interests between law enforcement and civilian communities, especially when law enforcement seems to operate above the law or is given special privileges that bypass civilian oversight.
Conclusion:
The Fraternal Order of Police aligns with some of the medieval knighthood traditions, especially in how it brands itself as a fraternity of honor and uses insignia as symbols of privileged authority. However, this structure—designed to protect the interests of police officers—may indeed act as a barrier to justice, particularly in cases of police misconduct or abuse of power, mirroring how an anti-civilian institution could function in a modern society. Thus, the FOP, while outwardly serving the civilian society, may be seen as upholding a system that often prioritizes its own members' interests over the well-being of the broader public, obscuring accountability and perpetuating inequalities within the legal system."
The moment I hear some dumbfuck talk about the welfare queen trope, I stop giving a fuck about their opinions.
There are nasty billionaires who take away what people need. Stop with the dumb questions replaying from the Reagan years about welfare queens. Idiots. Housing and all costs have gone up like crz since the 90s while most wages have not kept up, the system is a vampire.
Funny how happy we are. In the EU.
This setup is not the best for debate. The people in the circle can all raise their flags before the person is done even answering.
He could mention the trillions of dollars (that's a T, trillions) wasted on defense spending to make corporate powers richer and more powerful than any other entities in the world, and did absolutely nothing to make us "safe," and did not even prevent events like 9/11.
Amen, these corporations are the ones who came up with the term "welfare queens". To take the heat off of them. Typical conservative actions.
The vast majority of welfare recipients in Reagan’s America, when he coined the term “welfare queen” were WHITE WOMEN. War widows and single mothers. But all he needed to do was conjure up an image of a black woman some how conning Uncle Sam and it’s enough to latch onto the white psyche for nearly 50 years. 😒😒😒
Thick 💀 🇺🇸
Exactly! Billionaires and corporations are the biggest welfare cheats.
I am a deeply compassionate person. I have worked in human services and with my fellow human beings for most of my adult life. The thing is that both Talarico and the man asking the question are right. Talarico is right that the wealthy are siphoning off phenomenal amounts of money to protect their already protected status. The man asking the question is also right. We have created a culture of entitlement, a culture where many people don’t use social programs as a way to get a leg up and get back on their feet. They use social programs as a permanent entitlement, as a way to avoid responsibility for their own lives. I wish we could start having a conversation here that recognizes the truth in what everyone is saying, and that doesn’t deny it all around. We do need to address corporate greed and corporate welfare. We also need to address the fundamental disempowerment and resulting laziness and lack of responsibility from people on the lower end of the financial spectrum. Can we begin to do both?
The uninformed wish to stay uninformed… Trump loves an idiot
Think the middle class is paying way too much…. adjust those making over 500k and everyone should have to pay taxes
EXACTLY!!!
Amen!
You can keep giving them legitimate answers like this one. And they ask the same question after you give them the answer. I've had these conversations with people who identify themselves as conservative and its like im talking to a wall sometimes.
They only care about handouts to the poor. They LOVE handouts for the rich
I haven't heard a good conservative argument. Period.
A tax deduction for flying in a private jet? Why have I never heard of this? Why is that a thing exactly…? Seriously, what was the legal logic in that carve out
Usamos cookies para asegurar que te damos la mejor experiencia en nuestra web. Si continúas usando este sitio, asumiremos que estás de acuerdo con ello.
Dude really appropriated "nasty" from the big orange cheeto 😂 what a tool.
How does he define "nasty", he screamed out his racism with that welfare queen BS.
I think nasty people are the ones who are willing to starve children, disabled people, and the elderly to justify their racist vitriol.
“There are people who take advantage of the system.” Respectfully, who cares? If they find these imaginary people, taxes will still come out at the same rate. And when it comes to actual fraud, the total is a fraction of a percent of what we pay. Go after the billionaires. That’s where the money is!
He's absolutely right but he doesn't sound authentic
Amen
So he changed the topic, typical politician.
It still amazes that they think the only people on welfare are black people (welfare queen) the vast majority of people on welfare are caucasian, the vast majority of people who take advantage of welfare are caucasian, I've seen a ton of videos of caucasian people living in mansions on welfare. The problem in this country is the elites and the lack of accountability
Using the rhetoric, of two unhinged presidents… Reagan and Trump. The welfare queen line come from Reagan, and the nasty from Trump.
This guy is nothing but , a republican sycophant! The welfare Queens are the rich, you dummy.
"Slavery to monarchs and ministers, which the world will be long in freeing itself from, and whose deadly grasp stops the progress of the human mind, is not yet abolished."
[A Vindication of the Rights of Women, Mary Wollstonecraft, 1797, 3: The Same Subject Continued]
I want to point out that everything he says is factually correct and verifiable, but it's the wrong kind of argument to use to win over these people. The argument should be: if we do something about poverty and reduce or even eliminate it in the United States, it means a large portion of the population will have more money in their pockets—more money they can use to buy shoes, food, and clothing from large corporations. This means more profit for those large corporations. So, if those large corporations do something to help the poor, they are preventing future profits for their own companies. This may not be the most moral argument, but it's the argument that the CEOs of the biggest American companies will listen to from their gilded thrones.
"In the Anglosphere, and especially in America, many believed that the liberties of the Anglo-Saxons had been destroyed by the Norman Conquest in 1066.14
[14 See, e.g., DAVID HUME, 1 HISTORY OF ENGLAND 160–85, 194–98, 208, 226–27 (Liberty Fund 1983) (1778); id. at 226–27 (“[I]t would be difficult to find in all history a revolution more destructive, or attended with a more complete subjection of the antient {anti -+Gr. ethnikos gentile: Webster's, 1943} inhabitants.”); id. at 437 (the majority of Anglo-Saxons were reduced “to a state of real slavery”); FORREST MCDONALD, NOVUS ORDO SECLORUM: THE INTELLECTUAL ORIGINS OF THE CONSTITUTION 76–77 (1985) (noting influence of “the Norman yoke” in American Revolution ideology); CHARLES WRIGHT & KENNETH W. GRAHAM, JR, FEDERAL PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE § 6342, at n. 80–107 (summarizing the common view of Americans and of English Whigs about the imposition of “the Norman yoke” in 1066).]"
[THE POSSE COMITATUS AND THE OFFICE OF SHERIFF: ARMED CITIZENS SUMMONED TO THE AID OF LAW ENFORCEMENT, DAVID B. KOPEL, 2015]
"First, we must understand that English common law is not civil law."…
"Like the rest of creation, man is subject to laws laid down by the Creator. Man, unlike the rest of creation, has a certain degree of free will, but, says Blackstone, even this free will is governed and limited by God's law.
Furthermore, man is not left to his own, fumbling around in search of an elusive law; rather God has affirmatively revealed His law so that man may find it acceptable."
[Sir William Blackstone & the Common Law, Robert Stacey, Ph. D., 2003, p. 47 & 61]
The billionaires are the welfare Queens. As usual the Reich wing totally misses the point, and definitely doesn’t understand it. They almost get it.
He's saying that now! But when or if he gets in he will turn just like the rest.
Me: "I have found that the FOP seems to seek to emulate or even darker, totally represent, an anti-civilian instrument of institutional power, if not corruption.
Consider these two quotes in context to how the FOP is structured, branded, and functions within a civilian society:
"The Orders of Knighthood of our own day, like those of the days of Medieval Chivalry, are Fraternities of Honor. See Chap. XX."
[The Handbook to English Heraldry, Charles Boutell, 1867]
"In like manner, all honorable Insignia of every kind may be displayed in association with a Shield or Achievement of arms. And, in accordance with the same rule, Foreign Orders and Insignia may be displayed, provided that they have been duly recognized and admitted in this country."
[The Handbook to English Heraldry, Charles Boutell, 1867]
ChatGPT: "The Fraternal Order of Police (FOP), when examined in the context of the two quotes from The Handbook to English Heraldry about Orders of Knighthood and honorable insignia, appears to embrace certain traditions that evoke the hierarchical, quasi-military, and secretive qualities associated with medieval chivalric orders. These qualities, when applied to modern policing, highlight a structure that may mirror or even represent an anti-civilian or anti-democratic force, as you suggested. Here's how these ideas connect:
The Fraternal Order of Police as a Modern Chivalric Order:
1. Fraternities of Honor:
The FOP, much like the Orders of Knighthood described in the quote, presents itself as a fraternity of honor that enshrines the values of loyalty, discipline, and service to a higher calling, namely law enforcement.
Similar to chivalric orders from medieval times, the FOP's structure is designed to protect and maintain a sense of honor among its members, which can include mutual defense even when officers are involved in questionable actions (e.g., misconduct or abuse of power).
This fraternal bond may contribute to the FOP's tendency to prioritize internal solidarity over external accountability, especially when it comes to protecting officers accused of violence or misconduct.
2. Heraldry and Insignia:
The FOP’s use of insignia, such as badges and emblems, can be likened to the heraldic shields and honorable insignia worn by knights. These symbols carry weight and prestige, both within the organization and in the broader public perception.
Badges and insignia, as honorable emblems, convey authority and respect, often leading civilians to defer to police officers without questioning the power they hold or the methods they use.
However, much like the knighthood's authority, these symbols can be wielded in ways that might shield individuals from scrutiny, offering them privileges and protection that extend beyond the reach of ordinary citizens, reinforcing a hierarchical structure where the officer is positioned above the civilian.
The FOP as an Anti-Civilian Instrument:
Given the fraternal and honor-based structure described, it's possible to view the FOP's role in civil society as more aligned with elite protection than with the welfare of the public. While its stated purpose is to serve and protect, the reality often involves preserving the power and interests of its members, particularly when those members engage in violence or abuse of power. This is exacerbated by the solidarity among police officers, which can translate into covering for each other and shielding their actions from the public eye or legal accountability.
Anti-Civilian Themes:
Lack of Accountability: In some cases, the FOP has been seen as obstructing reforms that might introduce greater transparency or oversight into police activities, essentially acting as a barrier to justice for victims of police misconduct. This can create a two-tiered system where law enforcement is treated as above reproach.
Public Perception: The FOP’s heavy use of insignia and the symbolism of honor can lead to the elevation of police officers to a status akin to untouchable authorities, reinforcing a civilian-subordinate relationship rather than a citizen-officer partnership based on mutual trust and respect.
Oligarchic Protection: Like other powerful institutional bodies, the FOP may sometimes act more as a protector of police interests than a protector of public justice. This contributes to a clash of interests between law enforcement and civilian communities, especially when law enforcement seems to operate above the law or is given special privileges that bypass civilian oversight.
Conclusion:
The Fraternal Order of Police aligns with some of the medieval knighthood traditions, especially in how it brands itself as a fraternity of honor and uses insignia as symbols of privileged authority. However, this structure—designed to protect the interests of police officers—may indeed act as a barrier to justice, particularly in cases of police misconduct or abuse of power, mirroring how an anti-civilian institution could function in a modern society. Thus, the FOP, while outwardly serving the civilian society, may be seen as upholding a system that often prioritizes its own members' interests over the well-being of the broader public, obscuring accountability and perpetuating inequalities within the legal system."
https://chatgpt.com/share/678930df-6ae0-8004-97ce-cfdd6033cccb
B.S. your body works better in a fasted state
If you don't like being bald, just grow hair.
The moment I hear some dumbfuck talk about the welfare queen trope, I stop giving a fuck about their opinions.
There are nasty billionaires who take away what people need. Stop with the dumb questions replaying from the Reagan years about welfare queens. Idiots. Housing and all costs have gone up like crz since the 90s while most wages have not kept up, the system is a vampire.
Funny how happy we are. In the EU.
This setup is not the best for debate. The people in the circle can all raise their flags before the person is done even answering.
He could mention the trillions of dollars (that's a T, trillions) wasted on defense spending to make corporate powers richer and more powerful than any other entities in the world, and did absolutely nothing to make us "safe," and did not even prevent events like 9/11.
Amen, these corporations are the ones who came up with the term "welfare queens". To take the heat off of them. Typical conservative actions.
The vast majority of welfare recipients in Reagan’s America, when he coined the term “welfare queen” were WHITE WOMEN. War widows and single mothers. But all he needed to do was conjure up an image of a black woman some how conning Uncle Sam and it’s enough to latch onto the white psyche for nearly 50 years. 😒😒😒
Thick 💀 🇺🇸
Exactly! Billionaires and corporations are the biggest welfare cheats.
I am a deeply compassionate person. I have worked in human services and with my fellow human beings for most of my adult life.
The thing is that both Talarico and the man asking the question are right. Talarico is right that the wealthy are siphoning off phenomenal amounts of money to protect their already protected status.
The man asking the question is also right. We have created a culture of entitlement, a culture where many people don’t use social programs as a way to get a leg up and get back on their feet. They use social programs as a permanent entitlement, as a way to avoid responsibility for their own lives.
I wish we could start having a conversation here that recognizes the truth in what everyone is saying, and that doesn’t deny it all around.
We do need to address corporate greed and corporate welfare.
We also need to address the fundamental disempowerment and resulting laziness and lack of responsibility from people on the lower end of the financial spectrum.
Can we begin to do both?
The uninformed wish to stay uninformed… Trump loves an idiot
Think the middle class is paying way too much…. adjust those making over 500k and everyone should have to pay taxes
EXACTLY!!!
Amen!
You can keep giving them legitimate answers like this one. And they ask the same question after you give them the answer. I've had these conversations with people who identify themselves as conservative and its like im talking to a wall sometimes.
They only care about handouts to the poor. They LOVE handouts for the rich
I haven't heard a good conservative argument. Period.
A tax deduction for flying in a private jet? Why have I never heard of this? Why is that a thing exactly…? Seriously, what was the legal logic in that carve out