US Politics Mega-thread - Page 6741

On February 02 2017 13:38 plasmidghost wrote:

Making all of America great again in the process... maybe
Conspiracy theory time: the CIA wants this so that they can sell all the heroin in North America

On February 02 2017 13:40 zlefin wrote:

I hear people mention it a lot on forums, it seems far less common in mainstream political discourse.

of course to use such a plan you really need to subscribe to a consequentialist theory of ethics, and many people have a much more deontological approach.

Among the numerous concerns addressed by 2010’s Dodd-Frank financial reform bill was the so-called “resource curse,” whereby mineral or fossil fuel-rich countries are unable to transform their wealth into economic growth and development, often falling victim to corruption and poor governance. The final bill included a measure, co-sponsored by Senators Ben Cardin and Richard Lugar, requiring that all oil, gas, and mineral companies on the U.S. stock exchange disclose any payments they make to foreign governments for licenses or permits for development. It aimed to curb bribery and give poor countries rich in resources a chance to hold their governments and resource-extraction companies accountable. After years of delay, on June 27, 2016, the Securities Exchange Commission published a final version of the rule that enforces Cardin-Lugar. It was set to go into effect in 2018.

On February 02 2017 13:48 Logo wrote:
It's funny how fast people are to say dismiss the Quebec terrorist as not part of the right/alt-right, but then lump anti-fascist anarchists in as the left.

On February 02 2017 13:46 OuchyDathurts wrote:


Well yeah, that's what I meant. People will talk about it online and places but it never comes up in any place of actual consequence. Take their money, guns, and power away by taking the massive black market away from them.

On February 02 2017 13:53 Falling wrote:

Forgive my mischaracterization; where would you put anarchists? Unless they are anarcho-capitalists, they tend to be on the left side anyways, just deep into libertarian territory, if you want to use the political compass. The Marxist revolutionaries were at least violent people on the left side of the spectrum- my main point being that the right does not have the copyright on violence.

On February 02 2017 13:57 Logo wrote:


I never implied violence was one sided?

But it's a common theme that groups like neo-nazi's, white supremacists, and "lone wolf" shooters get passes as not being a legitimate part of the right while the extreme left groups like anarchists somehow always seem to be the left.

If you don't believe me just keep in mind the protests that have happened when you keep reading news. I'm highly confident at some point you'll run across someone lumping all anti-Trump protests in as violent protests attempting to erase the many highly peaceful protests that have taken place.

On February 02 2017 14:09 xDaunt wrote:

The Right gets a pass for its bad guys because there are so few of them that it is difficult, if not impossible, to legitimately tar the entire Right for what the few bad guys do. On the other hand, the Left has a seemingly endless legion of assholes who riot, scream, yell, and otherwise cause trouble in the name of Leftist causes. And this legion of assholes is often funded by Leftist donors such as Soros. This makes it very easy for people like me to stick their bad acts on the Left as a whole. Of course, it doesn't help that y'all on the Left do basically nothing to disavow the Regressive Left. I promise you that that fact has not gone unnoticed by centrist Americans.

On February 02 2017 14:15 zlefin wrote:

which centrist americans are complaining about that?
I'd like to hear more from them, do you have links handy?
or an optimal source to look for them complaining about this topic?

also there's plent yof regressive right around.

On February 02 2017 14:09 xDaunt wrote:

The bad guys on the Right get passes because there are so few of them that it is difficult, if not impossible, to legitimately tar the entire Right for what the few bad guys do. On the other hand, the Left has a seemingly endless legion of assholes who riot, scream, yell, and otherwise cause trouble in the name of Leftist causes. And this legion of assholes is often funded by Leftist donors such as Soros. This makes it very easy for people like me stick their bad acts on the Left as a whole. Of course, it doesn't help that y'all on the Left do basically nothing to disavow the Regressive Left. I promise you that that fact has not gone unnoticed by centrist Americans.

On February 02 2017 12:56 RuiBarbO wrote:


Actually the political right have all but abandoned facts for narrative, the left's attachment to sound reasoning is what's made them so weak in the soundbite era

...

See how easily I contradicted what you said, it's almost as if neither you nor I have said anything substantive or remotely worth considering

On February 02 2017 13:27 DeepElemBlues wrote:
Fascists at UC Berkeley mobbing Trump supporters and beating them with fists and feet and flagpoles, setting fires, destroying property, shooting fireworks at police, pepper spraying people generally being fascists, because Milo was going to have a speech there tonight. Which was canceled of course as there weren't enough police on the scene to protect the building the speech was supposed to take place in.

There's zero difference between these "protesters" and SA stormtroopers starting riots at opposing political rallies in 1920s Germany.

But remember, it's Trump and his supporters who are the fascists. The next time hundreds of Trump supporters start rioting and beating Trump opponents will be the first. Trump opponents have done it at least a half-dozen times.

It's only a matter of time before someone gets killed by these fascist "protesters."

On February 02 2017 14:09 xDaunt wrote:

The Right gets a pass for its bad guys because there are so few of them that it is difficult, if not impossible, to legitimately tar the entire Right for what the few bad guys do. On the other hand, the Left has a seemingly endless legion of assholes who riot, scream, yell, and otherwise cause trouble in the name of Leftist causes. And this legion of assholes is often funded by Leftist donors such as Soros. This makes it very easy for people like me to stick their bad acts on the Left as a whole. Of course, it doesn't help that y'all on the Left do basically nothing to disavow the Regressive Left. I promise you that that fact has not gone unnoticed by centrist Americans.

In the 2006 midterms, Democrats such as then-Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee chair Rahm Emanuel understood their path back to the majority was through moderate Democratic candidates; he was right. Voters no longer trusted the Republican majority but were not looking to vote for a liberal Democrat. When the Democrats offered up moderate candidates, their middle-of-the-road ideology jelled with the majority of Americans.

They won and they won big.

And the Blue Dogs coalition, 44 moderate members from across the country including four here in Pennsylvania, became the shining example of what Americans wanted, a Democratic Party that more closely resembled their grandpa's party. [...]
Today the Blue Dogs are decimated, there are only 17 left, only two of them women. And every year they face expensive, heated primary battles from progressives, and are about to face the same onslaught next year from the 2018 Bernie Sanders purists who want them out of "their" party.

Legendary Democratic strategist Dane Strother thinks that is a very bad idea.

"If the Blue Dogs do not have a seat at the table, and if they do not rebuild, the Democrats will never hold the majority again," he said bluntly.

Strother added that if there is a progressive purity test, "Then we will be in the wilderness for the next forty years," he said.

"I think the Blue Dogs have to be revived and respected this cycle. There will be a test. If the party does not back the incumbent Democrat Blue Dog in the primary then the Democrats will have a big problem for a long time."

"We can't become so ideologically pure that we push moderates into the GOP ... because that is what we are doing right now," he said, adding that the party that holds onto the middle is the party that will govern. [...]

"We need to stop talking about winning 3 million more votes than Trump and start talking about all of the state house, senate and congressional seats we've lost and why," said Strother.

"Ignoring, deflecting or not facing the problem is just digging our heads in the sand, and quite frankly we are running out of sand."

On February 02 2017 15:29 plasmidghost wrote:
Regarding the whole Milo talk portest, this is exactly what he wants. The more people make a scene at his events, the more people look him up and the more popular he gets. So what if 1000 people didn't get to hear him in person? He just got trending all over social media and got covered by all the major news outlets. The protesters are idiots for playing into his way obvious hands

 Leaked Draft of Trump’s Religious Freedom Order Reveals Sweeping Plans to Legalize Discrimination

 A leaked copy of a draft executive order titled “Establishing a Government-Wide Initiative to Respect Religious Freedom,” obtained by The Investigative Fund and The Nation, reveals sweeping plans by the Trump administration to legalize discrimination.

This article was reported in partnership with the Investigative Fund at the Nation Institute.

The four-page draft order, a copy of which is currently circulating among federal staff and advocacy organizations, construes religious organizations so broadly that it covers “any organization, including closely held for-profit corporations,” and protects “religious freedom” in every walk of life: “when providing social services, education, or healthcare; earning a living, seeking a job, or employing others; receiving government grants or contracts; or otherwise participating in the marketplace, the public square, or interfacing with Federal, State or local governments.”

The draft order seeks to create wholesale exemptions for people and organizations who claim religious or moral objections to same-sex marriage, premarital sex, abortion, and trans identity, and it seeks to curtail women’s access to contraception and abortion through the Affordable Care Act. The White House did not respond to requests for comment, but when asked Monday about whether a religious freedom executive order was in the works, White House spokesman Sean Spicer told reporters, “I’m not getting ahead of the executive orders that we may or may not issue. There is a lot of executive orders, a lot of things that the president has talked about and will continue to fulfill, but we have nothing on that front now.”

 Language in the draft document specifically protects the tax-exempt status of any organization that “believes, speaks, or acts (or declines to act) in accordance with the belief that marriage is or should be recognized as the union of one man and one woman, sexual relations are properly reserved for such a marriage, male and female and their equivalents refer to an individual’s immutable biological sex as objectively determined by anatomy, physiology, or genetics at or before birth, and that human life begins at conception and merits protection at all stages of life.”

...

 In particular, said Lupu, the draft order “privileges” a certain set of beliefs about sexual orientation and gender identity—beliefs identified most closely with conservative Catholics and evangelical Christians—over others. That, he said, goes beyond “what RFRA might authorize” and may violate the Establishment Clause.

Lupu added that the language of the draft “might invite federal employees,” for example, at the Social Security Administration or Veterans Administration, “to refuse on religious grounds to process applications or respond to questions from those whose benefits depend on same sex marriages.” If other employees do not “fill the gap,” he said, it could “lead to a situation where marriage equality was being de facto undermined by federal employees, especially in religiously conservative communities,” contrary to Supreme Court rulings.