Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Graelyn]

I'm afraid. I'm afraid of the United States.

At least you are aware of the lens through which you are projecting many of your arguments.

It's more than I can say for many of the folks in my political science classes, who often hold strong opinions and cannot even begin to explain why they do so.

I still don't think fear is a healthy base from which to operate. It leads to faulty thinking.

[Invelious]

I'm afraid. I'm afraid of the United States.

At least you are aware of the lens through which you are projecting many of your arguments.

It's more than I can say for many of the folks in my political science classes, who often hold strong opinions and cannot even begin to explain why they do so.

I still don't think fear is a healthy base from which to operate. It leads to faulty thinking.

Years of constant pride pumping brain washing will do that.

[Kaleigh Doyle]

Hence why arguing on the internet about politics is a joke.

[orange]

Looks like it says it's likely to pass, not that it has yet. We'll see what happens. Personally, I think Obama might just grow some balls and veto it. Otherwise the Supreme court gets to go lolno, the constitution does still exist even if we ignore a little bit of it.

Or it becomes a test of the officer's oath.

[BloodBird]

I'm speechless. This shit passed?

And the argument earlier was 'has america taken steps to become a police state yes/no'. If that passes, there won't be much arguments about 'steps' anymore.

Sad. It used to be 'innocent until proven guilty.' Now it might be that it's not even guilty until proven innocent, it's more like 'guilty, fuck the trial.'

This bill passing will make any trooper or officer anywhere who arrests any citizen on suspicions guilty of first-degree treason against their own constitusion. That it's come to this is absolutely absurd.

[orange]

I'm speechless. This shit passed?

And the argument earlier was 'has america taken steps to become a police state yes/no'. If that passes, there won't be much arguments about 'steps' anymore.

Sad. It used to be 'innocent until proven guilty.' Now it might be that it's not even guilty until proven innocent, it's more like 'guilty, fuck the trial.'

This bill passing will make any trooper or officer anywhere who arrests any citizen on suspicions guilty of first-degree treason against their own constitusion. That it's come to this is absolutely absurd.

It will possibly make the officers violators of our oath.  Officers in the US military do not swear an oath to support & defend the Congress, President, or People of the United States.  We swear an oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic.

I will however note that the Writ of Habeas Corpus has been suspended in the past by the President of the United States in certain States.  It was eventually found to be legal.

The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.

Depending on the degree to which people follow the machinations of a foreign anarchist* & his American conspirator* in pursuit of "equality," the Constitution may actually support suspending the Writ.   I consider both these men to be enemies to the United States Constitution and I think there intent is to spur a rebellion in the United States.

*Referencing this article.

The question before the Senators (or possibly President/Supreme Court) is whether or not the United States has an on-going Rebellion or Invasion.

Edit:  It looks like it may have passed the Senate.  However, the President as said he will likely veto the bill.

[Z.Sinraali]

Do you think we're facing an ongoing rebellion? When many of the major demands of the 99% movement are to enhance the power of the government (vis a vis regulating the financial industry) rather than dissolve it?

P.S. Not just officers. Same thing's in the enlisted oath.

[orange]

Do you think we're facing an ongoing rebellion? When many of the major demands of the 99% movement are to enhance the power of the government (vis a vis regulating the financial industry) rather than dissolve it?

P.S. Not just officers. Same thing's in the enlisted oath.

No, I do not think we are facing an on-going rebellion.

The originates and the actual protesters are different groups with different ideologies.

Enhancing the power of government can be unconstitutional and can be pursued through rebellion against the existing government.  An individual might lead the overthrow a republic and establish themselves as king/dictator and centralize the government's control, it does not mean it is not a rebellion against the republic.

[Z.Sinraali]

Well I'd say the act of rebellion is necessarily defined in what it envisions for the current government. To "overthrow a republic" is the defining act in your example, not the later centralization.

Though I have a suspicion we're pretty much saying the same thing in that regard.

[orange]

Two Opinion pieces out of the LA Times with regards to Occupy.

A manifesto for the Occupy movement

I think the first is important and what the larger Occupy movement is lacking, real goals and desires.  Everyone gets it, "your angry," but if you cannot tell me what you are really angry about it is really hard to address the frustration.

During the lead up to the SuperFail, some Tea Party Republicans were trying to push to start with tax reform.  Established Democrats pushed back and said no deal without higher taxes on the wealthy.  Reform, especially evoking Reagan-era reforms, is likely to get a lot of conservative support.  Perhaps instead of focusing on the solutions that drive us apart, we can start with solutions everyone can agree to (like Tax Reform).

I think 4/5 issues can be addressed in short order if worked from the middle and not from the extremes.  The issue with the rising cost of education becomes a discussion of what level of education should everyone pay for and is it more important to improve primary education than reduce cost of higher education.  Education systems across the US are f-d up and just throwing money at the problem will not solve it.

What's so awful about the 1%?

This gets back to something I was trying to get across much earlier in the discussion.  Plenty of those in the 1% were not born into their wealth, they started as part of the 99%.

[Senn Typhos]

"1%" has become for the left of the country what "socialism" has become for the right.

It's basically the same tactic McCarthy made use of, back in the day, and to great effect. A group selects one word, or a phrase, and begins using that word as a tag for every negative issue they perceive. For the right, "socialism" gets attached to abortions, gay marriage, lack of employment, etc. "1%" becomes a term for everyone who makes more money than you do, for the left.

Eventually, the word itself is lost - in McCarthyism, "communist" stopped meaning "one who practices communism" pretty quickly. Without realizing it, people forget what the word means, and only focus on its association with everything they place negative value on. People start having a shared understanding of the negativity, without having the same concept attached to it; for one person it means a weakened economy, for the person standing next to him it means prayer in school, but they don't say those things. They say "socialism," or what have you.

It gets to a point where all one has to do is say the magic word, and it doesn't matter what their actual point was. Ten thousand people hear ten thousand things in that one word, without any of it being accurate, but they all agree.

[lallara zhuul]

It is a very human mechanic and it has been used by every leader in their time.