If you want to stifle a political discussion and scale it away from the issues and back to just talking about Trump all day feel free. We can just mute all that crap

If someone wanted to make a thread about drug testing welfare recipents Id love to have a dialogue on a topic like that. Or an argument for US expansion.

I'm not criticising the decisions made to have more decorum in the forum, there's still plenty of opportunities for participants to express themselves & engage in disputation with others

How do you define "welfare recipients" ? There's a huge range of clientele on various government money teats....do tax subsidies count as welfare ? Wall Street recipients of taxpayer funded bail outs ? Not sure you can drug test a Bank. How about drug testing all people holding an elected position on a taxpayer funded salary ?

People complain about too many people being on welfare and too much money being spent on welfare. The solution is to spend more money on drug testing too?

Ive never understood that (predominantly conservative) thinking. Normally a party that shuns the idea fundamentally of "spending money" to save money.

Best example being the famous Sanders vs Rand Paul debate on spending money to save money on seniors perscription drug costs and delivery. Hilarious really.

What it says to me is that welfare, is this demon boogeyman cash cow that conservatives fear most is actually one of the more honest, needs based govt. Aids.

"What exactly, specifically is an uncalled for diatribe when you literally have a republican party waging war on basic civil rights?"
Hmmmmmmmm, I don't know, no unsubstantiated diatribes here.

I mean, the Democrats have been waging war on a basic right for years too. It's just not one they happen to like because of their "feels"

How is it unsubstantiated? Trump-Pence have said LGBT law should be rescinded, we know he has no respect for women, would reverse roe v wade in a heartbeat.

Those are basic civil rights according to the supreme court. So either they just say shit to court votes or they mean them.

Trump is for building a wall and deporting mexican workers and families. We dont treat our most vulnerable like this. Any moral teachings would agree with me.

Trump supports getting rid of the healthcare law which millions of people are surviving on. And replacing it with what? Hes never said.

Trump wants to put a tariff on china. Which economists estimate would plunge the globe into a total recession. How is this not an affront to fiscal rights?

Have I uhh.. substantiated enough for you or shall I go on? We havent eve touched on property rights and how trump doesnt care about land ownership morality.

Warden wants people to think out a single post and then wait for responses instead of bombarding people with blanket statements that do little but make a conversation more difficult to enter. With such affronts to social dignity right in our faces, how can we deal with the more distant ones such as Trump?

"Trump-Pence have said LGBT law should be rescinded, we know he has no respect for women, would reverse roe v wade in a heartbeat."
They can't and they won't. If you believe, the propaganda machine has gotten to you.

Oh a veiled insult to undermine the talking points. How shocking to see on webdip.

And a bunch of +1's like usual. Man I am the best setup guy on this site for giving douchebags free one liners which have zero substance at all other than rudeness.

From someone who's spent years studying the government and how it operates, it isn't going to happen. It's an unsubstantiated talking point.

Passive aggressive fucking cowards with nothing better to do than cherry pick everything for cheap laughs.

Shove your +1's up your bloated assholes.

You create a flood of conversation and act offended when people don't want to talk to you. Slow down and show you're willing to think through your own posts and maybe people will think you're worth having an actual conversation with. As it stands, I can tell you haven't even thought through your own end of the conversation, so why should I burden you with mine?

As for your supposed "talking points" there is a huge difference in saying something 'should' be done and in actually implementing it. Granted, you can fall down a slippery slope and start implementing some truly terrible things, we need only look at Germany leading up to WWII, but it's hardly as if deporting people who have illegally entered a nation, or disagreeing with unsatisfactory legislation is an affront to "basic civil rights."

Out of the last 25 posts, 17 have been yours brain. I don't think it's an insult for Warden to ask you to compile them.

Uhh Prado the last time we put a Republican in the white house he destroyed our privacy, our economy, and thats just naming a few civil rights.

"Shove your +1's up your bloated assholes."

I thought Octavius was the one with issues about freedom of expression .

Politics are cool

The economy is not a civil right.