Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
October 22, 2017, 04:06:28 pm
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Election 2016 predictions are now open!.

  Show Posts
Pages: 1 ... 71 72 73 74 75 [76] 77 78 79 80 81 ... 310
1876  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / U.S. Presidential Election Results / Re: Marin County, CA on: February 24, 2015, 06:56:40 pm
Also: Ford may have been a Republican, but he would have seemed fairly moderate or even slightly liberal (compared to a growing number of conservatives in the GOP) on issues like abortion, the environment, war and peace, the Equal Rights Amendment, and civil rights more generally-especially compared to someone like Reagan (who, of course, almost beat Ford in the primary in 1976). 

Note that Carter was an evangelical Protestant Southerner with a moralistic image, so it's not like he had much appeal to (largely secular or nominally religious at best) Marin County voters on  "latte liberal" social/cultural issues (although these weren't even as big of a deal in the 1970s as they would become later).

Ford was a Republican who could win Marin in 1976, but as the Republican Party was moving to the Right (with Reagan as the conservative standard-bearer), Marin went in the opposite direction during the 1980s.
1877  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Obama breaking out the veto pen today for Keystone on: February 24, 2015, 06:39:25 pm
Now the Republicans have forced his hand and proved that he would rather get donations from the Sierra Club than money for the economy.

The economy will be fine minus those 50 permanent jobs + whatever cleanup jobs come up after spills.

Considering the big Democratic job creating idea - road jobs and infrastructure - creates very few permanent jobs as well, it seems a rather silly thing to harp on.

Yeah it's not like investments in infrastructure are important or are even needed in this county. 
1878  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: BREAKING: Ron Paul still a racist on: February 24, 2015, 06:26:23 pm
For the record, there are just as many White people on food stamps as black people.

That's not racism, that's hyper-partisanism, which one still wouldn't expect from Ron Paul (and is still wrong).

No.

I think the subtext is that black people are entirely "the other," apart from white people and only self-interested.  It's an inability to imagine that black people are thinking, reasoning human beings, rather they're like animals who are hungry and want "our" stuff.

And, there's the fact that Ron Paul has a history of publishing racist screeds, so you don't give him the benefit of the doubt where this could just be interpreted as a poor choice of words.

Yep.
1879  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Obama breaking out the veto pen today for Keystone on: February 24, 2015, 06:25:46 pm
From what I've heard, I think it makes sense to approve the Keystone XL. 

That said, Republicans act like this is some enormous issue and the pipeline would save the economy.  It terms of the economy, it's meaningless.  For both sides, it's clearly more symbolic than anything. 

So, why not use this issue to compromise?  Liberals give in on the Keystone and in exchange, we get the Infrastructure Reinvestment Bank or improvements to the Clean Air Act.  That would make sense, no?

Agreed.

However, I think Obama's made it quite clear he's done compromising.

It was your party who refused to compromise with Obama to begin with. Have you forgotten the past 6 years?
1880  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Obama breaking out the veto pen today for Keystone on: February 24, 2015, 02:47:51 pm
Make him veto it every single day for the rest of his term.

The public is behind it. He hasn't given any legitimate reason why he's against it. This is a joke.

Quote
Obama's veto notwithstanding, the White House said there was no "final disposition" on whether a permit will be issued for the pipeline, which has become a major flashpoint in the national debate over climate change. Rather, Obama is rebuffing a congressional attempt to circumvent the executive branch's "longstanding process for evaluating whether projects like this are in the best interests of the country," Earnest said.

1881  General Politics / Political Debate / Re: Assault Weapons Ban on: February 23, 2015, 05:11:17 pm
I find it fascinating that an individual right to keep and bear arms-outside the context of a "well-regulated militia", which FWIW would have included all adult (white) male citizens, as mandated (!) by state governments, at the time of the Constitutional Convention-was not a mainstream understanding of the Second Amendment for nearly 200 years.
1882  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: 57% now support sending U.S. ground troops to fight ISIS on: February 23, 2015, 04:50:46 pm


there's no dialog left here.  you accord the USA with a right to use violence around the world in order to spread "liberal, democratic values".  you believe every society around the world has to accept these values or they'll be subject to invasion.  and you believe that so long as anyone (not even a state) is plotting or thinking of plotting some violent act within the US, the US has the right to use violence in attempt to stop it, without consulting anyone else.

it's all Imperial mentality 101, shared by doves and hawks.  the only real factor is whether it's "worth it" in terms of financial and human cost.

I clearly didn't say that.  We can use violence to defend ourselves from armed attacks in a proportional way.  If Yemen allows Al Qaeda to operate in their country and plan attacks on us, they've given up the right to complain when we defend ourselves.  If the failed states in the Middle East could arrest their terrorist elements, there would be no need to use military force.  

I understand you're edgy and anti-American and all.  But, at least come up with more original ideas.

You mean the governments that the United States and its allies have (historically and currently) propped up? Whether it be the House of Saud (as if Wahhabism has nothing to do with al-Qaeda or ISIS, et. al...), the Mubarak regime (look at what happened to them), or even in the not-too-distant past, Saddam Hussein's Baathist dictatorship (before he went "rogue"), modern Middle Eastern governments have tended to be undemocratic client states, as a general rule.

If you wonder why "they" hate "us", then you haven't been paying attention.

Very lazy, slipshod thinking there. 

There are a few failed states around the world that pose a terrorist threat to the US.  Yemen and Somalia are the two purest examples.  The US didn't exactly prop those governments up.  Both were Soviet aligned during the Cold War.  We also didn't back Iraq during the Saddam era.  So, that theory I don't buy.

And, is our dealing with corrupt dictators a major source of terrorism?  No.  I don't see much connection.  The fact that we had an embargo on Iraq garnered us much more criticism in the Arab world than our brief military dealings during the Iran-Iraq War.  Muslims fanatics hate democracy anyway, so would they want to punish the US for support anti-democratic regimes? 

By your logic, the US should be seeing terrorist attacks from Chile, Indonesia and Nicaragua as revenge for our misdeeds in the Cold War.  And, indeed, that hasn't happened.  Islamic terrorism isn't revenge against the United States for what we've done wrong. 

I think we in the US tend to look at our own agenda and cast the rest of the world as purely reacting to us.  That's pretty ignorant.  Foreign terrorist groups mostly care about their own countries and they have objectives of their own. 

What I meant is that US foreign policy decisions over a number of decades haven't exactly garnered the US and its allies much support for the "Global War on Terror" within many Islamic countries (or many other countries in general). I'm not saying its all our fault, but if we are serious about changing hearts and minds...

1883  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: 57% now support sending U.S. ground troops to fight ISIS on: February 23, 2015, 12:31:10 pm


there's no dialog left here.  you accord the USA with a right to use violence around the world in order to spread "liberal, democratic values".  you believe every society around the world has to accept these values or they'll be subject to invasion.  and you believe that so long as anyone (not even a state) is plotting or thinking of plotting some violent act within the US, the US has the right to use violence in attempt to stop it, without consulting anyone else.

it's all Imperial mentality 101, shared by doves and hawks.  the only real factor is whether it's "worth it" in terms of financial and human cost.

I clearly didn't say that.  We can use violence to defend ourselves from armed attacks in a proportional way.  If Yemen allows Al Qaeda to operate in their country and plan attacks on us, they've given up the right to complain when we defend ourselves.  If the failed states in the Middle East could arrest their terrorist elements, there would be no need to use military force.  

I understand you're edgy and anti-American and all.  But, at least come up with more original ideas.

You mean the governments that the United States and its allies have (historically and currently) propped up? Whether it be the House of Saud (as if Wahhabism has nothing to do with al-Qaeda or ISIS, et. al...), the Mubarak regime (look at what happened to them), or even in the not-too-distant past, Saddam Hussein's Baathist dictatorship (before he went "rogue"), modern Middle Eastern governments have tended to be undemocratic client states, as a general rule.

If you wonder why "they" hate "us", then you haven't been paying attention.
1884  General Politics / Political Geography & Demographics / Re: Do non-Anglophone countries have their own version of "white trash" culture? on: February 23, 2015, 12:20:38 pm
Not a good idea for a thread.
1885  General Politics / Individual Politics / Re: Opinion of Rudy Giuliani on: February 23, 2015, 12:15:20 pm
Quote
...what's remarkable about Giuliani, and a point underlined in this flick, is how little sympathy he spared for those he ruled. He couldn't abide complaints from the poor and he was antagonistic to public schools. As Giuliani notes in the film: "My father used to threaten to put me in public school . . . and that was a really frightening thought."

Rudy couldn't even get along with Rudy -- in this case, his African American schools chancellor, Rudy Crew. In the documentary's most startling footage, Crew describes his efforts to befriend Giuliani, in hopes of persuading him to support reform of the public schools. They share yucks and cigars, but when the mayor pushed for school vouchers, it's safe to say the relationship didn't pan out.

"I find his policies to be so racist and class-biased," Crew says now. "I don't even know how I lasted three years. . . . He was barren, completely emotionally barren, on the issue of race."

The film tarries at that unfortunate pass in Giuliani's mayoralty: Hizzoner's tone-deaf reaction to a growing outcry about police brutality and thousands of questionable arrests. In 2000, undercover officers shot to death Patrick Dorismond, a black security guard, during a drug crackdown. (Dorismond, as it turns out, had no involvement with drugs. He thought the undercover cops were robbers, and was shot while resisting arrest.) Afterward, Giuliani directed his officials to unseal the man's juvenile record and opined that Dorismond was "no altar boy."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/25/AR2006052502136_pf.html
1886  Forum Community / Forum Community / Re: Update Season XXI: "Scientific Facts Are Not Hard And Fast Rules." on: February 23, 2015, 12:05:07 pm
Alright Bushie listen to this.

lol good one.
1887  Forum Community / Forum Community / Re: Update Season XXI: "Scientific Facts Are Not Hard And Fast Rules." on: February 22, 2015, 11:45:15 pm
I still had pretty good success there for 11 1/2 months.  I'm confident I can continue that success at another Help Desk.  I am not applying for any run-of-the-mill customer care call centers where I have not had success, but I am applying for help desk call centers where I have had at least moderate success.

?
1888  General Discussion / History / Re: Who micromanaged their war more( LBJ or Bush) on: February 22, 2015, 02:46:46 pm
The idea that George W. Bush "micromanaged" anything is amusing.
1889  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: States that "Seem" Red or Blue on: February 22, 2015, 02:45:24 pm
Pretty much any state seems red if you don't drive through a major city. And every state seems blue if you just fly into the cities.

Eg: California.
1890  Forum Community / Forum Community / Re: Update Season XXI: "Scientific Facts Are Not Hard And Fast Rules." on: February 22, 2015, 02:43:12 pm
When I was hanging out with BRTD yesterday we talked about BushOklahoma. This gave me a terrifying realization that just as BRTD was a real person standing in front of me, Bushie was also a real person out there somewhere. This is terrifying.

Indeed.  I visualize people based on their avatars, and the thought of some posters being real people (ss super flash, bronz, OC, solarstorm2012) is truly horrifying.

If NYE posts a pic I might have to leave.

For me it would be t_host1, although I expect the photo would just be an extreme close up of his its left hand or an eyebrow.  Still, it would shake my confidence in everything I understand about him. it.

Fixed.
1891  Forum Community / Forum Community / Re: Opinion of Irvin Baxter on: February 22, 2015, 01:59:10 pm
Another excellent character from Update.
1892  Forum Community / Forum Community / Re: Update Season XXI: "Scientific Facts Are Not Hard And Fast Rules." on: February 22, 2015, 01:50:14 pm
Bushie, while your "diet" was loose in terms of actually igniting weight loss, can you at least see the correlation of putting drinking water on hold for a day with your parents and waking up the next morning with a headache so massive you had to miss church?

Maybe your body, created by God, is trying to tell you something with these headaches?

Isn't the human body a temple? It says so in the Bible. You know, the only book Bushie reads.
1893  Forum Community / Forum Community / Re: Update Season XXI: "Scientific Facts Are Not Hard And Fast Rules." on: February 21, 2015, 10:27:19 pm
*insert comment about diabetes, heart disease, etc. here* 
1894  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Guiliani: Obama under Communist influence since age 9 on: February 21, 2015, 01:00:52 pm
Quote
I don’t (see) this President as being particularly a product of African-American society or something like that. He isn’t,” the former mayor added. “Logically, think about his background. . . The ideas that are troubling me and are leading to this come from communists with whom he associated when he was 9 years old” through family connections.

When Obama was 9, he was living in Indonesia with his mother and his stepfather. Giuliani said he was referencing Obama’s grandfather having introduced him to Frank Marshall Davis, a member of the Communist Party.

The former mayor also brought up Obama’s relationship with “quasi-communist” community organizer Saul Alinsky and the Rev. Jeremiah Wright.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/giuliani-claims-obama-influenced-communism-article-1.2123541

1895  General Discussion / Religion & Philosophy / Re: Why do Bushie-style Christians not accept LGBT Christians? on: February 20, 2015, 01:38:17 pm
FWIW, here's what the Southern Baptist Convention's position statement on sexuality says (IIRC, Bushie is Southern Baptist, no?):

Quote
We affirm God's plan for marriage and sexual intimacy – one man, and one woman, for life. Homosexuality is not a "valid alternative lifestyle." The Bible condemns it as sin. It is not, however, unforgivable sin. The same redemption available to all sinners is available to homosexuals. They, too, may become new creations in Christ.

http://www.sbc.net/aboutus/positionstatements.asp
1896  General Politics / Individual Politics / Re: Is feminism the solution to what MRAs often complain about? on: February 20, 2015, 01:14:40 pm
Wasn't rape within marriages not illegal in some states until the 90s?

Also, re: MRAS-what kind of additional rights (legal or even just in terms of cultural expectations) do specifically men need that they (we) don't already have? There's a reason that men aren't a protected class.
1897  General Politics / Political Geography & Demographics / Re: Lib Dems (UK): What is their constituency? on: February 20, 2015, 12:11:58 am
I've always understood that the Lib Dems are rough ideological equals to the U.S. Democratic Party, and that Labour is what the U.S. Democratic Party used to be in the 1950s and 1960s. 

But the Democratic Party has never been socialist or even social-democratic.
1898  General Politics / Individual Politics / Re: LBJ was both an FF and a HP. on: February 19, 2015, 02:45:15 pm
I find the veneration of LBJ's personality by some liberals suspicious. It seems that beyond  the realities of LBJ's policies - a mixed bag at best - are glossed over in favour of admiration of 'the Johnson treatment'. How many times have I heard variations of the phrase 'If only Johnson was president now, we'd have universal healthcare (substitute for liberal dream policy of choice)? It seems to be affection of some liberals that positive change is driven by autocratic men swinging their dick around (metaphorically and literally). But this in practise is a dangerous state to be in. In practise it meant the Johnson administration was testosterone fuelled and arrogant. Consensus was thrown out of the window, and all for the petty pursuit of johnson's love of being glorified as a 'great president'. Although i will not declare LBJ was amoral or a monster - especially in contrast to his successor - his personality was of his time. But the Johnson treatment and all it entails - the backroom deals, the intimidation, the seedy clubs, the backscratching - is long dead, and rightly so.

^^^
1899  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Obama's anti-extremism/terrorism summit on: February 19, 2015, 02:24:18 pm
Quote
The president rejected the notion that the West is at war with Islam.

"These terrorists are desperate for legitimacy and all of us have a responsibility to refute the notion that groups like ISIL somehow represent Islam because that is a falsehood that embraces the terrorist narrative," Obama said. "At minimum as a basic first step countries have a responsibility to cut off funding that fuels hatred and corrupts young minds and endangers us all."

He added that violent extremism is fed when human rights are violated or stunted, saying that "lasting stability and real security" require free elections and independent judiciaries.

“When people are oppressed and human rights are denied, particularly along sectarian lines or ethnic lines, when dissent is silenced, it feeds violent extremism,” Obama told the world leaders in attendance. “It creates an environment that is ripe for terrorists to exploit. When peaceful democratic change is impossible, it feeds into the terrorist propaganda that violence is the only answer available."


Huffington Post

and

Full Speech Text
1900  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: What has Biden been up to? on: February 18, 2015, 03:17:23 pm
He's doing the People's business, of course.
Pages: 1 ... 71 72 73 74 75 [76] 77 78 79 80 81 ... 310


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines