US Politics Mega-thread - Page 1874

On April 24 2015 04:48 Acrofales wrote:
China is a democracy? Lol. No. China is an oligarchy.

On April 24 2015 04:55 Paljas wrote:

no

as i said, I'd volunteer to be a monarch for you guys.
i'd be really easy to replace, big promise

Comcast has scrapped plans to merge with Time Warner Cable in a $45.2 billion deal that would have combined the country’s two largest cable and broadband providers, according to a Bloomberg report Thursday.

The move comes a day after the Federal Communication Commission said it planned to oppose the deal, joining lawyers from the Justice Department who felt it would not help consumers. The FCC said it would issue a “hearing designation order” that would prolong the deal, making it more difficult and expensive for Comcast.

Comcast spokeswoman Sena Fitzmaurice and Time Warner Cable spokesman Bobby Amirshahi both declined to comment. But Bloomberg reported that a formal announcement of the terminated deal would come by Friday.

The merger faced vehement opposition from many who claimed such a deal would stifle competition by creating a monopolistic beast. As it is, Americans have limited options compared to other developed countries for buying cable or Internet. A combined Comcast and Time Warner Cable would have represented 54 percent of the entire U.S. market.

On April 24 2015 05:03 Millitron wrote:

China's legislature is elected. And the legislature appoints the Premier. Not all that different than our president appointing Supreme Court justices.


The South was a democracy. Legislatures and governors were all elected by the white male people. True, the elections weren't very fair, but I didn't say they were a good democracy. The state governments function largely the same now as they did back then. So if they weren't a democracy then, they aren't one now.

When I say dictators are easy to replace, I don't mean they step down quietly. I mean they're easier to kick out than a failing democracy.

WASHINGTON — The Senate's top five Republican leaders have cosponsored legislation to extend until 2017 the Obamacare insurance subsidies that may be struck down by the Supreme Court this summer.

The legislation, offered by Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI), one of the most politically vulnerable Senate incumbents in 2016, would maintain the federal HealthCare.gov tax credits at stake in King v. Burwell through the end of August 2017.

The bill was unveiled this week with 29 other cosponsors, including Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) and his four top deputies, Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX), John Thune (R-SD), John Barrasso (R-WY) and Roy Blunt (R-MO). Another cosponsor is Sen. Roger Wicker (R-MS), the chairman of the conference's electoral arm.

Such a move would seek to protect the GOP from political peril in the 2016 elections when Democrats would try to blame the party for stripping subsidies — and maybe insurance coverage — from millions of Americans in three dozen states. A defeat for the Obama administration in a King ruling would likely create havoc across insurance markets and pose a huge problem for Republicans, many of whom have been pushing the Supreme Court to nix the subsidies.

"This bill is a first step toward reversing the damage that Obamacare has inflicted on the American health care system," Johnson said.

He recently explained the rationale for the legislation, warning that Democrats would swarm the GOP with attacks and horror stories about "individuals that have benefited from Obamacare" and lost their coverage.

On April 24 2015 05:03 Millitron wrote:

China's legislature is elected. And the legislature appoints the Premier. Not all that different than our president appointing Supreme Court justices.


The South was a democracy. Legislatures and governors were all elected by the people. True, the elections weren't very fair, but I didn't say they were a good democracy. The state governments function largely the same now as they did back then. So if they weren't a democracy then, they aren't one now.

When I say dictators are easy to replace, I don't mean they step down quietly. I mean they're easier to kick out than a failing democracy.

On April 24 2015 05:33 Acrofales wrote:

No, it would be like having direct elections to appoint the city council, who in turn elects the county council who in turn elects state government, which elects the congress. The influence the democratic aspect of this process has on the outcome in congress is negligible, and it is basically a network that can is a mix of oligarchy and meritocracy (it is possible for rising stars to make a difference, as long as they fit within the one-party system).

On April 24 2015 05:21 puerk wrote:


fixed that for you

On April 24 2015 06:07 Millitron wrote:

How much influence do we really have though, when both parties are basically the same on most issues?

It doesn't really matter who you elect when both options are the same.


I said it wasn't fair. I didn't say it was a great democracy. But it was a democracy.

On April 24 2015 06:13 Acrofales wrote:


If you redefine demos to mean not "the people", but "the elite group of people that you have redefined to be the people" then anything is a democracy. Hell, Mugabe is a democratic! He and his cronies (we will now call this "the people", or demos) chose him and rigged all elections since the 80s to reflect that!

You do realize that our modern definition of democracy means something other than "government chosen by election, no matter how unfair", right?

On April 24 2015 06:21 WolfintheSheep wrote:

People that define democracy like that are the same vein of people that refuse to use the word "communism" for anything except the pipe-dream that theorists and philosophers write about.

It's a useless definition that only serves to prop up some false ideals about how things should be.

On April 24 2015 06:38 Acrofales wrote:

Huh? You have a pretty good democracy in the US. I think the democracy in Brazil is an actual democracy too (although you can always question whether the people who are elected are actually in power at all). You can argue the merits of a direct and indirect system. However, there comes a point where it is simply no longer a democracy, even if the local government claims otherwise. South Africa during Apartheid was a democracy for about 10% of the population. That isn't a democracy. It's an oligarchy. Claiming otherwise voids the meaning of the word democracy. As does calling China's government a democracy, or anywhere (including the US) before universal suffrage.

On April 24 2015 06:48 WolfintheSheep wrote:

I mean, you can certainly argue that current and historical democracies had severe issues with equality of their citizens, and the right to vote being only a representation of a specific group of people. But saying it's not a real democracy is falling straight into the whole "no true Scotsman" fallacy.

Even if things like women's voting rights, and democratic rights of minorities, only really came into being in the mid 20th century, you're going to have a very, very hard time arguing that the Western democracy didn't begin in 18th century Europe.

PHOENIX (AP) — Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio dropped a bombshell in court Thursday when he said his former lawyer had hired a private investigator to look into the wife of the federal judge presiding over a contempt of court case against the sheriff.

The hearing took the strange turn after Arpaio had finished his testimony and Judge Murray Snow began asking him questions, including whether the sheriff was investigating his family.

Arpaio said he believed his former lawyer, Tim Casey, had hired a private investigator to look into his wife. The investigation stemmed from a purported comment Snow's wife made about the judge not wanting Arpaio to get re-elected in 2012.

Casey declined comment, citing attorney-client privilege, when The Associated Press reached him after the development in court.

Snow has been overseeing a sprawling racial-profiling lawsuit winding its way through the courts for several years. Snow determined in 2013 that Arpaio's office systematically racially profiled Latinos during traffic stops then called this week's contempt-of-court hearing after Arpaio defied his orders to stop carrying out immigration patrols.

Arpaio's office has a history of investigating his opponents. Two elected county supervisors and a judge were among those investigated and charged with crimes in the past decade after feuding with the sheriff's office.

The Justice Department has filed a lawsuit against the sheriff to look into abuse-of-power allegations over the political feuds.

On April 24 2015 07:00 Acrofales wrote:

Okay. Name a democracy in 18th century Europe.

It definitely had its roots there, and you could argue that there are many forms of governments that incorporate democratic elements... but The Netherlands (probably the country you are thinking of) was not a democracy in the 18th century despite being a republic, and the UK certainly wasn't despite having a Parliament.

On April 24 2015 07:00 Acrofales wrote:

Okay. Name a democracy in 18th century Europe.

It definitely had its roots there, and you could argue that there are many forms of governments that incorporate democratic elements... but The Netherlands (probably the country you are thinking of) was not a democracy in the 18th century despite being a republic, and the UK certainly wasn't despite having a Parliament.

On April 24 2015 07:07 WolfintheSheep wrote:

Read: No true Scotsman fallacy.

On April 24 2015 07:07 WolfintheSheep wrote:

Read: No true Scotsman fallacy.

On April 24 2015 03:32 Paljas wrote:

"far left" -> Bill Maher

never change america, never change

On April 24 2015 07:17 Acrofales wrote:


So name one.

WASHINGTON -- Democrats' frustration with President Barack Obama's trade agenda bubbled over Thursday, with key opponents accusing their party's leader of putting more effort into a bid to aid corporate America than anything he's done for the middle class.

Calling it "maddening," Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) told reporters that the Obama administration was putting on a full-court press unlike anything Democrats have ever seen in his presidency in order to win the authority to fast track enormous trade deals.

"I think if you could get my colleagues to be honest, on the Democratic side, with you -- and I think you can mostly -- they will say they've been talked to, approached, lobbied and maybe cajoled by more cabinet members on this issue than any issue since Barack Obama's been president," Brown said.

"That's just sad," he added.

Brown and Sen. Bob Casey (D-Pa.) spoke to reporters about their frustrations a day after the Senate Finance Committee advanced a package of legislation that would grant Obama Trade Promotion Authority, as fast track is more formally known. With it, the president would be able to use expedited procedures to pass the Trans-Pacific Partnership with a dozen Pacific Rim nations and the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership with Europe. Together, those two deals represent about two-thirds of the world's economy. Once Obama signs the pacts, Congress would then have no ability to amend or filibuster them, having only an up-or-down vote.

"I wish they put the same effort into minimum wage. I wish they put the same effort into Medicare at 55. I wish they put the same effort into some consumer strengthening on Dodd-Frank," Brown said.

On April 24 2015 04:11 oneofthem wrote:
the example of one guy is not supposed to be asking for that one guy to have all the powers. in a democracy the one guy has participatory power, in a monarchy there will be a point at which resistance is met by force. and democracy is not relativism of values, it is actually a set of substantive commitments to stuff like individual political and social power.

the appeal of having a monarchy for some of these libertarians is basically to defend strong set of natural rights, existing mechanisms having been found unsatisfactory only a mythical device would do.

so really the libertarian argument against the 'ineffectiveness' of democracy is very dishonest. it's actually a fear of the effectiveness of democracy that motivates this appeal for idealized monarchy. except the monarchy also embodies a set of ideal social states in which the worthy people are protected, and whatever dissent is simply illegal/immoral attempt to overcome the correct rights arrangements.