Voting is Still Wrong

130 posts / 0 new
Last post
Fidel

Benoit wrote:

Jehovah's Witnesses cannot be absolutely certain that only the Afterlife is worthy of our attention.

So what's the diff between JW's and secular whackos who dont vote?

 

Benoit

None. Both groups owe us a good reason to justify their abstinence and both are incapable to give us any. 

http://philreview.dukejournals.org/cgi/pdf_extract/110/4/563

Benoit

You have a false conception of what is a trial. The judiciary system is an institution dedicated to the exchange of reasons and to judging which ones can be called good reasons.

Cueball Cueball's picture

The fact that those engaging in this discourse are proposing to put people on trial for disagreeing with them on a political point, is enough reason to not to support them by voting. It makes the fact that their real objective is to impose their own authoritarian political will upon people all to clear.

The fact that mandatory voting is even being discussed seriously in left-wing circles, only adds urgency to the cause, and speaks of great moral corruption.

Cueball Cueball's picture

I have a very clear idea of what is on trial. The fact that mandatory voting is even being discussed seriously in left-wing circles, only adds urgency to the cause, and shows that the mainstream left has really lost its moral compass, In the court of morality it means that you, and others who think like you are condemned by your own words, through your attempt to make couch potatos political criminals:

Benoit wrote:
Compulsory voting means that if you are caught skipping an election, you will have to go defend yourself before a court of justice. I imagine the judge saying to Cueball: so you feel you are a prisoner in our state, would you like to be put in a real jail to become a martyr, after all, Nelson Mandela has achieved a revolution from inside his cell?

Benoit

Calling some human beings couch potatoes is worst than what I have attempted here.

For those who think social exclusion is not right, you may want to join other forums:

http://www.politiquebec.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=18&t=21204

http://www.canadaka.net/forums/improve-canada-f19/deliberative-democracy...

Benoit

Jail, and even capital punishment (like Jesus), is not social exclusion when a revolution takes roots on the sentencing or the sacrifice.

Cueball Cueball's picture

Jail is social exclusion. So are courts, and whatever other devices you are intending to use in your police state.

 

Benoit

Hey, it is yet another long thread that this Michelle will be too happy to close!

Cueball Cueball's picture

Yes and Pol Pots reeducation camps were a kind of political/psychological holiday camp.

In anycase I think you have been deemed to be an unfit participant in the deliberative assembly. Nor have you come up with a case that suggests that the decision is not an expression of the collective will, and so the group has decided that since "all rights are instituted by a collective will", as you put it, yours are forfeit.

Benoit

It is really a babbling room that Canadians should be ashamed of. The collective sulkiness that I have found here will never solve any world problems.

Cueball Cueball's picture

Nonetheless, you are bring anti-social and you should respect the will of the collective and shut up. Thanks.

Benoit

The collective's will AS A PEOPLE never stops talking.

Cueball Cueball's picture

It is always amusing when fascist whiners who are so emphatically for taking away the rights of others, become such whiners when theirs are removed.

You are not "the people" nor do you have the right to speak for them as a collective. As it is, there is a collective here and it has decided that you are anti-social and should go away. The fact that you can't respect that only indicates once more how your whole view is really an expression of egotistical desire to impose, your view, of what the collective will should be on everyone.

Benoit

To remove what you have read, you will need a lobotomy.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

Cueball wrote:
Nonetheless, you are bring anti-social and you should respect the will of the collective and shut up. Thanks.
Did you take a straw poll of your collective or is it a collective of one?

 

From North of Manifest Destiny

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

Cueball wrote:

You are not "the people" nor do you have the right to speak for them as a collective. As it is, there is a collective here and it has decided that you are anti-social and should go away. The fact that you can't respect that only indicates once more how your whole view is really an expression of egotistical desire to impose, your view, of what the collective will should be on everyone.

LMAOROF

Where you looking in the mirror when you wrote this? Benoit views are beyond the pale on some things but you lecturing anyone about anti-social behavior on this forum is extremely amusing.

 

 

From North of Manifest Destiny

Benoit

What has appeared anti-social is my urgency to talk. Canadians may soon find they are alone in the World to have so much time to lose.

Cueball Cueball's picture

You trolling me again? I can't remember a single incident on this board where the board categorically sided with you on the issue of my anti-social behaviour. In fact your posse of NDP coolaid addicts even tried to get me banned for my so called anti-social behaviour, and at the very least your the board recognized the rat-pack for what it was: more or less a goon squad. 

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

Cueball wrote:

You trolling me again? I can't remember a single incident on this board where the board categorically sided with you on the issue of my anti-social behaviour. In fact your posse of NDP coolaid addicts even tried to get me banned for my so called anti-social behaviour, and at the very least your the board recognized the rat-pack for what it was: more or less a goon squad. 

Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah

 NDP Bad NDP BAD NDP Bad NDP BAD

 Have I missed anything in your argument? You are a broken record that just keeps skipping back to the same line over and over and over and over and over and over.

Its too bad because you might even have something interesting and thoughtful to say if you didn't compulsively continue in every context to say NDP bad NDP bad NDP bad NDP bad NDP bad.

 

From North of Manifest Destiny

Fidel

Benoit wrote:
Hey, it is yet another long thread that this Michelle will be too happy to close!

[count von count]TWO EX-cellent posts. AH-AH! Aaaah! I love to count

Cueball Cueball's picture

kropotkin1951 wrote:
Cueball wrote:

You trolling me again? I can't remember a single incident on this board where the board categorically sided with you on the issue of my anti-social behaviour. In fact your posse of NDP coolaid addicts even tried to get me banned for my so called anti-social behaviour, and at the very least your the board recognized the rat-pack for what it was: more or less a goon squad. 

Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah

 NDP Bad NDP BAD NDP Bad NDP BAD

 Have I missed anything in your argument? You are a broken record that just keeps skipping back to the same line over and over and over and over and over and over.

Its too bad because you might even have something interesting and thoughtful to say if you didn't compulsively continue in every context to say NDP bad NDP bad NDP bad NDP bad NDP bad.

 

From North of Manifest Destiny

 

What you are really saying is that I "might even have something interesting and thoughtful to say if you" only attacked enemies of the NDP and didn't respond in kind when NDP'rs inists on attacking anyone who criticizes the NDP as whatever enemy of the people is current. Pick you colour, Greenie, Liberal, Tory or Communist.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

You see Cueball it is that very style of your postings that makes me want to puke. I said nothing of the sort but for some reason you think you get to define what other people are REALLY saying and then go on rants about what you said they are saying not on what they actually said.  Try responding to people's actual posts. Your constant use of strawman arguments in which you insert your view of the NDP for the what people are talking about is really tiring. Like most people on here my identity is certainly not primarily defined by any political party except in your fantasy land of Captain Cueball: Defender of all that is good and right; Slayer of the Evil NDP.

  

From North of Manifest Destiny

Fidel

Cueball wrote:
What you are really saying is that I might even have something interesting and thoughtful to say if you only attacked enemies of the NDP and didn't respond in kind when NDP'rs inists on attacking anyone who criticizes the NDP as whatever enemy of the people is current. Pick you colour, Greenie, Liberal, Tory or Communist.

Jeez, that's a lot of laundry to dump into the street. Are you calling us self-declared partisans "trolls"? What happened to your location, "Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll"?

remind remind's picture

Cueball wrote:
What does that say about Layton? Let me be clear; not much, necessarily, but we are talking about class here, and inherent class interests, not political outlook per se, but if you think a family like that is not an establishment family, I'd hate to see what you think "working class" is.

Uh, so what would they be the political class, activist class, or what?

I read up on their history and they seem to be pretty much working class in origin.

What is establishment? Or even what is non-establishment? And what does establishment mean even pertinent to this discussion?

My mother's family was here in Canada long, long, before Layton's was,  and perhaps even my father's, though they might not yet have moved across the 49th and into what would become Canada, and yet her name is a signatory to first the CCF party creation and later the NDP. And they were both life time social justice activists.

Aside from that, I find this comment of yours extremely troubling on many levels.

Quote:
... In fact your posse of NDP coolaid addicts even
tried to get me banned for my so called anti-social behaviour, and at
the very least your the board recognized the rat-pack for what it was:
more or less a goon squad.

How would you know if anyone tried to have you banned? It would seem that that should/would be inside of rabble information. If indeed you do know something like this has happened, then, it would seem some's privacy rights have been violated by someone at babble. And that is extremely disquieting, at best! Moreover, outting the babble board that told you this, on your part, is also extremely questionable behaviour.

Always assuming there is a NDP "goon squad" that tried to have you banned, as if there is, I am not aware of any such a movement, or indeed "goon squad". Or could it be you are making it all up? As I personally have a hard time believing that michelle, bcg, or oldgoat would share something that contains privacy issues with you.

 

 ETD for missing word and spelling

___________________________________________________________
"watching the tide roll away"

Cueball Cueball's picture

remind wrote:

Cueball wrote:
What does that say about Layton? Let me be clear; not much, necessarily, but we are talking about class here, and inherent class interests, not political outlook per se, but if you think a family like that is not an establishment family, I'd hate to see what you think "working class" is.

Uh, so what would they be the political class, activist class, or what?

I read up on their history and they seem to be pretty much working class in origin.

What is establishment? Or even what is non-establishment? And what does establishment mean even pertinent to this discussion?

My mother's family was here in Canada long, long, before Layton's was,  and perhaps even my father's, though they might not yet have moved across the 49th and into what would become Canada, and yet her name is a signatory to first the CCF party creation and later the NDP. And they were both life time social justice activists.

Aside from that, I find this comment of yours extremely troubling on many levels.

Quote:
... In fact your posse of NDP coolaid addicts even tried to get me banned for my so called anti-social behaviour, and at the very least your the board recognized the rat-pack for what it was: more or less a goon squad.

How would you know if anyone tried to have you banned? It would seem that that should/would be inside of rabble information. If indeed you do know something like this has happened, then, it would seem some's privacy rights have been violated by someone at babble. And that is extremely disquieting, at best! Moreover, outting the babble board that told you this, on your part, is also extremely questionable behaviour.

Always assuming there is a NDP "goon squad" that tried to have you banned, as if there is, I am not aware of any such a movement, or indeed "goon squad". Or could it be you are making it all up? As I personally have a hard time believing that michelle, bcg, or oldgoat would share something that contains privacy issues with you.

 

 ETD for missing word and spelling

___________________________________________________________ "watching the tide roll away"

 

How would I know? They said that is what they wanted to do in a thread. Repeated it seveal times. Then basically a thread got started on the topic. Bookish Agrarian started the ides, I think. Then of course without really saying as much the whole central committee jumped into the thread, as usual.

remind remind's picture

Really, starting a rabble reaction thread is hardly a "goon squad" effort to get you banned. Anyhow, seeing as you were just throwing wild accusations about, I am pretty much done here.

___________________________________________________________
"watching the tide roll away"

Fidel

kropotkin1951 wrote:

You see Cueball it is that very style of your postings that makes me want to puke.

For what it's worth, I think Cueball tries earnestly to practice U.S.-style political smear campaign, which is considered to be effective if done carefully. And the goal for any smear campaign relies on a basic truth of politics: That a majority of people vote for a candidate they admire and respect, and even if ppl dont agree with the candidate or party entirely. But if the practiser of the smear is able to undermine a voter's basic trust in a candidate, that vote can be undermined. The way is to find some bit of personal information that is suspect enough to create doubt in voters for the targeted political candidate.

All smear campaigns and dirty politicking involves  tedious research into the targeted candidate's political record and family life. Smear plumbers comb through news pieces, internet sites, and so on. It's not difficult for the best of the dirty campaigners to dig up something or other that might probably hurt a politicians' popularity in some way or another. It's American style dirty politicking, and it's part of what is wrong with that country's electoral process besides the elitists having to find a fresh face each time that hasnt been involved in some skull duggery or crooked dealings.

The NDP tends not to have to worry about those kinds of smears, and this why we see the lame attempts by Cueball to smear the NDP at every turn. He complains about self-declared NDP supporters on babble as if we are the trolls(and now goons). But the last time I checked, trolls hide under bridges because their true appearance is somewhat hideous. I'm not saying Cueball is actually hideous, just that he seems to want us to believe that he is non-partisan in his political views. The question is left for us, including those of us who stand in the light of day, to decide whether we believe that or not considering how much disapproval he expresses for everything and anything NDP.

Michelle

Threads over 100 posts are still wrong. ;)  Feel free to start a new one!

P.S. The excessive quoting is driving me bats.  Could we please, please edit the quoted parts to just the point we're responding to?

Pages

Topic locked