US Politics Mega-thread - Page 1266

On September 03 2014 00:25 sc2isnotdying wrote:


I hear this claim all the time from people on the right, that the left is streaming leftward, but it's absolutely an absurd claim. Even ignoring the fact that a 1 axis line is a shitty way to measure political ideology, the left in this country is about as left as it has been since the 30's. If anything, the left has moved slightly to the right.

Public healthcare: not a new idea
Gun control: not a new idea
Social justice: not a new idea
Keynesian economic policies: not a new idea
Communism: marginalized

Where exactly do conservatives think that the left has moved further left?

On September 03 2014 01:48 Danglars wrote:
The great society is expressly a 20th century move. Medicare and Medicaid both talked about as the fix. Now we need a public option, and forcibly change what a basic insurance plan looks like. Reid and others talk about universal healthcare and Obamacare as a useful stepping stone, just as Hillary was pushing for it in her day, now pushed again. Gun control was first open carry/concealed carry. Pushes for new and more stringent permitting process. Liberal states moved to only allowing guns in the home. Pushes for no more rifle-esque guns period. Pushes for now high capacity magazines. Liberals moved to make guns in the home under lock and key ... then for the ammo locked away from the gun (excellent home defense in my state!) I could spend all day on social justice, the only operative word being "more" since ubiquitously not enough has been done. Democratic socialist high taxation lavish safety cushion implemented gradually over time ... with all the accompanying perverseness of corporate income tax (don't worry small/medium business, I'm sure you can afford to hire those accountants to lessen the effective rates!). Day in day out demonization of big businesses by elected leaders for earning too much and for what they pay their employees. Corporate profits lampooned in such a free society, it's truly despicable. Without an ounce of irony, they turn around and decry corporate welfare of their own creation.

Yes, it is with good reason we say it. Blind as you may be, close in agreement with every new step, you do not see the staircase because there is only forward and downward. Back to the original point, in this progression when we get further and further away from the civil society and the social contract, libertarians and conservatives will come together on the common ground because economic freedom is so core of an issue for both, no matter how many disagreements on other laws.

On September 02 2014 18:16 Danglars wrote:
You seem to have a problem only thinking of extreme examples, which all the more reason why we bristle at others' mischaracterizations (especially done naively thinking there was no argument). Brooks is anathema to what conservatism represents, you might even differentiate what conservatives believe by drawing contrast with what Brooks believes. We also didn't forget his comments on a certain pants leg crease, nor the rest of his identity.

If you want libertarians first, and conservative only when the two views happen to agree, definitely point out Ron Paul or Murray Rothbard. With the left steaming further leftward, there will be widespread agreement between libertarians and conservatives.

Krauthammer's the only one on your list pretty solidly in the conservative camp. He'll weedle back and forth supporting RINO policy and supporting conservative policy, but commonly sides with the conservatives in the following weeks and months. Not a guy you'd ride into policy battles with, but that you'll read and think about.

You might also bristle if we talked about all democrats or European socialists as guys like Al Gore and Jesse Jackson ... even Harry Reid (you keep railin against those Koch brothers on the Senate floor! In my personal conversations with Democrat friends, they're quick to distance themselves from Reid nowadays). Or maybe refer to the face of the modern feminist movement as Cathy Brennan.

Not in the least. Then again, I don't know how wide your umbrella of authoritarian bullshit extends.

On September 03 2014 10:26 IgnE wrote:
I'm not making anyone a standard bearer of conservatism. Can you read? I haven't mentioned anything about hypocrisy or stupidity either. It's like you are trying to willfully misread what I've said.

On September 03 2014 12:05 coverpunch wrote:
No thanks, I'd rather not argue about why nobody understands your arguments. Let's move on to actual politics please.

For nearly a decade, the United States has been trying to fight the Somali Islamist group known as the Shabab, using everything from its African allies and economic sanctions to American missile strikes and commando raids.

On Tuesday, Pentagon officials announced that they had conducted American airstrikes to go after the leader of the Shabab directly, striking at the heart of a militant group that has allied itself with Al Qaeda and terrorized the region for years.

Rear Adm. John Kirby, the Pentagon press secretary, said military officials were trying to assess whether the Shabab leader, Ahmed Abdi Godane, had been killed in the strikes, which took place on Monday on an encampment and a vehicle south of Mogadishu, the capital. The attack was carried out by Special Operations forces using both manned and unmanned aircraft, launched, Admiral Kirby said, based on “actionable” intelligence that Mr. Godane was at the encampment.

The American warplanes dropped a number of Hellfire missiles and precision bombs. Defense officials said they believed that both the encampment and the vehicle had been destroyed, and that the militants there had been killed. But they were still trying to determine the fate of Mr. Godane.

“We certainly believe that we hit what we were aiming at,” Admiral Kirby said during a news briefing. He said that the United States would “continue to use all the tools at our disposal” to “dismantle Al Shabab and other terrorist groups.”

One American official in Nairobi said that “we’re 80 percent sure” Mr. Godane was killed in the strike. Still, militants in places like Yemen and Pakistan have been thought to be killed in drone strikes just like this one, only to resurface weeks or months later, crowing about having survived American attempts to kill them...

Admiral Kirby said that no American combat troops were on the ground calling in the airstrikes on Monday. “All I would tell you is we continue to work with partners in Somalia and in the region, but I won’t get any more specific than that,” he said.

On September 03 2014 03:34 IgnE wrote:



You too have missed the point. I wasn't trying to choose the most conservative person (whatever that fucking means anyway). I was trying to choose one who has clear instances of non-conservative tendencies. So it sounds like you are agreeing with me, even if you didn't know it. It's like you are reacting to self-fabricated offenses either because you can't read or because your conservative defense systems are so overwrought that you react to even non-threats. An obsession with purity perhaps.

On September 02 2014 06:22 IgnE wrote:


It's funny to me that you associate this conservative effort at population control (let's try and keep young black and impoverished kids off the streets so they don't associate with gangs and ruffians) with the monolithic mythical leftist project of the Nanny State. Sounds more like echoes of Ferguson than some socialist Nanny State plot. A curfew in place also prevents parents who are protesting from being out late since they can't bring their kids with them and probably can't afford a sitter to protest.

Former House Majority Leader Eric Cantor is moving to Wall Street, taking a job with investment bank Moelis & Co., the firm said.

Cantor, 51, who resigned last month after an upset loss in a Republican primary in June, will be vice chairman and managing director at the 7-year-old company founded by longtime Southern California investment banker Ken Moelis...

The new job is a significant bump in pay for Cantor, who earned $193,400 a year as majority leader.

Moelis will pay him an annual $400,000 base salary, according to a filing Tuesday with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Cantor also received a $400,000 cash payment and $1 million in restricted stock that will vest after his third, fourth and fifth anniversaries with the company.

In 2015, Cantor will receive a minimum incentive payment of $1.2 million in cash and $400,000 in restricted stock, the filing said.

On September 03 2014 15:52 Danglars wrote:

You certainly pick the strangest efforts to call conservative, which prompted all my efforts (should've quoted this one though to illuminate). I find it quizzical and humorous your take on the liberal basket cases of the modern urban areas and what you impute to be conservative policies. Now if you meant nothing by it, or just use the word conservative to describe anything and all you disagree with, then I have no quarrel. You do rob the term of meaning in your use.

On September 04 2014 03:29 Wolfstan wrote:
Conservatives would argue against taking away an individuals freedom to be out on the street, because of security and government knows better than the individual.
Conservatives feel most services, choices and needs should be met by the individual, then the community, then the state, then finally some federal babysitter 3000 miles away.
I agree with you that political parties often pass policies contrary to their ideology though.

CHAMPAIGN, Ill. (AP) — The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency on Tuesday said it has approved permits for the FutureGen clean coal project to store carbon dioxide underground, a key step in the longstanding plan to build the project.

FutureGen plans to store carbon dioxide, a greenhouse linked to climate change, after capturing it from a power plant in western Illinois.

"The issuance of the permit is a major milestone that will allow FutureGen 2.0 to stay on track to develop the first ever commercial-scale, near-zero emissions coal-fueled power plant with integrated carbon capture and storage," FutureGen Alliance CEO Ken Humphreys said in a printed statement.

The FutureGen Alliance is a group of coal companies that are trying to build the $1.65 billion project with $1 billion in financial assistance from the U.S. Department of Energy.

"FutureGen's goal is to capture and inject 1.1 million metric tons of carbon dioxide each year for 20 years," EPA said in a news release. "Sequestering 1.1 million metric tons of carbon dioxide each year is the equivalent of eliminating carbon emissions from 232,000 cars.

The project would refit an existing coal-fired power plant in Meredosia in western Illinois and, after capturing the carbon dioxide, pump it underground through four wells for long-term storage.

The permits mean that drilling for the wells could start as soon as October.

Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) raised eyebrows this weekend when he endorsed one of the most hawkish positions toward the Islamic State militants currently wreaking havoc in Iraq and Syria.

"If I were president, I would call a joint session of Congress," Paul told the AP. "I would lay out the reasoning of why ISIS is a threat to our national security and seek congressional authorization to destroy ISIS militarily."

That put the self-professed non-interventionist to the right of many of his fellow presidential hopefuls, who sounded more tentative notes when asked about the proper U.S. response. Seeking to "destroy ISIS militarily" would require some sort of ground presence in the region, and involve far greater American involvement in another Middle East conflict.

But during an interview on Sean Hannity's radio show on Wednesday, Paul sought to clarify that position. The libertarian-leaning senator said that Iran, Syria, and Turkey could be “enjoined” in fighting Islamic State militants because of their proximity and interest in the region.

“Right now, the two allies that have the same goal would be Iran and Syria, to wipe out ISIS. They also have the means and the ability and they also have the incentive to do so because Assad’s clinging for power and clinging for life there,” Paul said, as quoted by BuzzFeed.

The possible presidential contender also said that while the U.S. can provide air support, other nations should ultimately take the lead in rooting out Islamic State militants on the ground.

On September 03 2014 16:26 IgnE wrote:


I meant what I said. Imposing a curfew is driven by an essentially conservative impulse. The meaning is quite intact. Regardless of who is imposing the curfew, the character of the action is essentially one of imposing order by expressing it through a hierarchical social structure and executing it through the police force. Does a more liberal parent or a more conservative parent institute a curfew for his or her children? It's the same impulse. This is basic stuff, but you seem to think that the essence of an action is dictated by the actor's political party, rather than by the action itself, rooted in context. That's absurd.

On September 04 2014 09:56 aksfjh wrote:

Lolwut? Isn't his draw that he isn't some hawkish interventionist? GG politics, GG.