Political Discussion Thread (With Rules)

[megaplayboy]

The twilight of the fossil fuel industry is on the horizon anyway.  Within a decade electrics will be fully cost and feature competitive with gas powered cars.  Coal is already dying.  By around 2060 I expect electric cars to outnumber gas powered cars, and by the end of the century, the only thing oil will be used for is for lubricants and plastics.  

[csyphrett]

They had a vote and they are moving ahead on debating which plan they want to use to repeal the ACA

CES

[Old Man]

To support mega's point:

 

 

 

Non-subsidized costs for solar and wind are already cheaper than any other source of energy and are still decreasing.  It's over for the fossil industries, and no I didn't leave a word out there by mistake.  Even the fossil fuel companies have admitted as much internally, they're just trying to buy time to make the pivot, and are trying not to get stuck with the bill for cleaning up their carbon dumping.

[Cancer]

There's a lot of money there now, though, and it cannot be overemphasized just how powerful that is, and just how strong the inertia is for staying with the old energy sources (*cough* China *cough*). As long as they can mine out Australia for cheap and dump the exhaust in a way that doesn't kill untold millions in real time, they won't change their modus operandi.

[Old Man]

Totally understand.  Ironically, though, the Chinese have it together more than the US or Australia--they're pushing renewables hard while outright cancelling new coal plant construction (even on partially completed plants).  The realities of their energy requirements prevent them from shutting down their zillions of existing coal plants overnight, so Australian coal miners will have a customer for a while longer.  Completely opaque city air that kills people in days rather than decades will get even a socialist dictatorship to respond, apparently.

[Tech priest support]

China shows another reason to dump fossils, the deadly clouds of pollution in Beijing. Of course the Chinese government isn't affected sand anyone who complains or demands action is sentence to a slaver labor prison for dissent so there's little pressure on them.

[Old Man]

On the contrary, the Chinese government is well aware of the deep unpopularity of toxic air and is pulling out all the stops to clean it up before they get another Tiananmen.  That was the point of my poorly-written post, anyway.

[Lectryk]

China invests heavily in solar - Future Energy: China leads world in solar power production - BBC News and there are more cites and articles about the same or similar efforts underway to move China to renewable energy sources, like - China Cancels 103 Coal Plants, Mindful of Smog and Wasted Capacity - The New York Times

[Sociotard]

Gabby Giffords D-Arizona. She had to retire from office. The NC Democratic office. 2010.

CES

Valid. But the Steve Scalise shooting and the Hillsborough, North Carolina firebombing are recent while the Democratic examples are old news.

[Sociotard]

If you want to talk about political violence in america, which party do you believe most people who burn abortion clinics and murder abortion doctors vote for?

 

What party got the votes of people who do arson, vandalism, intimidation, and related eco-terror? Animal rights motivated attacks?

 

We all need to watch our rhetoric.

[Tech priest support]

Valid. But the Steve Scalise shooting and the Hillsborough, North Carolina firebombing are recent while the Democratic examples are old news.

Maybe that "old news" helped fan the fires that lead to the scalise shooting. Maybe that old news still matters to some people.

 

Oh and what about trump telling his supporters to "beat the crap" out of a protestor? What about the trump supporter who rushed up to a man being pulled away by police and cowardly punching him while the police held him, they gleefully telling the news cameras "Iff'n we see him again we may have to kill him!"?

 

Is the case in Texas where a trump supporter bragged about the great liberal genocide he couldn't wait for old news?

 

How about when Alex Jones roared at his audience that Bernie sanders supporters should have their jaws broken during the last election?

 

The ameircan right has been escalating the hate filled rhetorhic and calls for violence against democrats all thru the Obama presidency. In some ways perhaps their own incitements to hate violence have created a new and bad climate in this country. It may surprise them that when you change the climate the wind can blow in more than one direction.

[Tech priest support]

What party got the votes of people who do arson, vandalism, intimidation, and related eco-terror? Animal rights motivated attacks?

 

We all need to watch our rhetoric.

The eco extremist violence is usually against property and not people.with the notable exception of Ted Kaczynski. Anti abortion violence is often aimd at people with the intent to commit murder. Eric Rudolph set two bombs at an abortion clinic and one was set up to murder rescue workers coming to treat casualties and fight the fire to terrorize them into not helping abortion clinics. He also set a bomb at the Olympic park and a gay bar as an attack against "sodomites".

 

In 2011 a white supremacist tried to set of a bomb at a MLK rally in Spokane Washington, the bomb was loaded with fishing weights smeared with toxins, anti coagulants and feces to produce maximum casualties. It was found and disarmed.

 

Yes eco extremists have committed attacks against some industries but in each case their attacks were aimed at property not people, again except for the unabomber. Right wing terrorists attack people with murderous intent. Just like the terrorists who bombed the Boston Marathon.

[Tech priest support]

China invests heavily in solar - Future Energy: China leads world in solar power production - BBC News and there are more cites and articles about the same or similar efforts underway to move China to renewable energy sources, like - China Cancels 103 Coal Plants, Mindful of Smog and Wasted Capacity - The New York Times

I'm glad to hear this.

[Nolgroth]

To pretend that either side has some sort of moral superiority is flat out disingenuous. Both sides are responsible for where we are now. People from both sides have done reprehensible things. There is a distinct climate of "Us vs. Them" on both sides. The only difference as to who the bad guy is lies solely where you decide to define your allegiance.  It is so hard to pick a side when I see ABSOLUTELY NO GOOD GUYS in American politics. I see no good guys from the activists on either side. There may be some out there, but I'll be damned if I can name a single political entity that I consider morally good. Near as I can tell, the only good comes accidentally. The same goes for the media. I have watched bastions of Liberal thought and die hard Conservative media. Again, the only difference is who claims victory in an exchange and who has the fingers of self-entitled indignation pointed at them.

 

I can say a lot more but the simple truth of the matter is that people are looking for somebody to blame and hate for all the ills (real and imagined) that have been visited upon them. The dehumanization of the other side is so damn easy right this moment because of that. Just remember that the average Liberal and the average Conservative could likely meet up a restaurant, have dinner, talk about whatever recent sporting event they attended and then go home without ever realizing how different their political views are. I like to think that, without this thread, all of us would see the better parts of each other rather than the parts we decide to alienate. Yeah...I'll leave it there.

[megaplayboy]

I'm trying to imagine "both sides do it" rhetoric as applied to, say, the political parties in the United States in 1860.

It occurs to me that there may in fact be value in determining the extent to which each side does "it"--frequency, intensity and extremity.

While that may seem a distateful exercise for some, i suspect that it would prove illuminating. If one compares the Obama and Trump administrations, for another example, the facile inadequacy of "both sides do it" should be fairly obvious.

[Michael Hopcroft]

That violence is once again viewed as a valid political tool in this country is not just sad -- it's frustrating as all get out.

 

Political violence is wrong regardless of the intent. Which begs the question of what is worth killing each other over.

 

We are a superhero RPG community. We invent stories where everything we hold dear faces existential threats on an almost weekly basis. And there is value to that, because these are things that we can deal with and it encourages us that we can. Plus it's fun!

 

Sometimes, though, it is important to recognize the difference between a game and life. In real life, we cannot solve our problems with an 8d6 Blast, Penetrating, OAF, 8 Charges.(60 Active Points, 24 Real Points). We have to work. And our best efforts frequently go disastrously wrong.

[Nolgroth]

I suspect that such an exercise would be counter-argued and ultimately be way more subjective than objective. Everybody wants to claim high ground because it is human nature to want to be the "good" side or the "reasonable" side or whatever label you want to attribute a positive self image to. I am often just as guilty of being that way. As to the political parties of 1860, we are not in that time frame. We are in the now and so much has changed since the 1860's and on so many levels. Ultimately, the point of my post wasn't to exonerate either side, but to condemn both. It was also meant to point out that, as individuals, we can often see past party ideology in the process of becoming, if not friends, at least friendly acquaintances. 

 

However, belief and ideology being what it is, I can only offer an opinion of how I perceive the world. I will not try to force it down your throat.

[megaplayboy]

Condemning both sides empowers the side willing to be worse. Because no matter what they do, "both sides do it".

[Joe Walsh]

So, just as the Senate's getting ready to strip health coverage from millions of Americans, Trump tweets out that he's banning trans people from the military. Doesn't that just scream distraction, or is it just me? Don't get me wrong -- it's sad for the people the ban will actually affect, and it's yet another indication that Trump's presidency is an abomination, but come on! Headlines are screaming about something that affects the career choices available to a tiny number of people, while the issue that's life-or-death for millions is relegated to below-the-fold status. Exactly as Trump's team intended, I'm sure.

[Joe Walsh]

And, just to review:

 

Democrats spend more than a year trying to make health care better for all Americans. They hold public hearings, get input from all parties (including Republicans!), and ultimately pass a bill that, while very much imperfect, does extend coverage to millions. Republicans loudly denounce the process as undemocratic, the outcome unAmerican, and immediately launch legal actions against it. They succeed in giving states the choice of whether to use Federal money to cover the working poor, and many red states immediately refuse such coverage for their citizens. That means that poorer, sicker people are forced into the exchanges than anticipated by the law, so the costs borne by insurers are much higher than anticipated in those states, leading to large premium increases and, ultimately, forcing many insurers out of those states' exchanges entirely. Republicans claim this is all a sign the health care law is evil.

 

But before the law even takes effect, the American people promptly vote Democrats out of power in Congress for passing this health care law.

 

Now, many years later, Republicans are in complete control of the Federal Government. They are using secretive, rushed processes to pass their own ideas about health care into law. Every time anyone gets a look at their proposals, it's easy to see that they will result in millions of people losing coverage. That means more bankruptcies, more suffering, more death. The health care industry doesn't want the new law, and it's even unpopular with Republican voters. Yet, Republicans are going to jam it through, using as undemocratic a process as possible, to appease the minority of Republican voters who do want this, because they are also the ones who are most vocal and engaged.

 

It's a great time to be alive.

[Lord Liaden]

Deleted

[Lord Liaden]

So, just as the Senate's getting ready to strip health coverage from millions of Americans, Trump tweets out that he's banning trans people from the military. Doesn't that just scream distraction, or is it just me? Don't get me wrong -- it's sad for the people the ban will actually affect, and it's yet another indication that Trump's presidency is an abomination, but come on! Headlines are screaming about something that affects the career choices available to a tiny number of people, while the issue that's life-or-death for millions is relegated to below-the-fold status. Exactly as Trump's team intended, I'm sure.

 

I'm not even sure they strategize that clearly. Especially President Trump -- he appears to tweet about whatever catches his attention at the moment. His attention span seems really short.

[BoloOfEarth]

His attention span seems really short.

 

And that's why I call him our Toddler in Chief.  That, and the tantrums.

[Joe Walsh]

Yeah, you wonder how much they're able to manage him, or even give the appearance of managing him, at this point.

 

Still, it jibes with an editorial I read shortly after the election, that was from someone from a country that went from democracy to dictatorship (Venezuela?), warning us that the administration will try to distract us with stuff that seems vitally important and extremely outrageous, while they're doing the stuff that more fundamentally affect the country. It's just something I've kept in mind over the last 6 months.

[Xavier Onassiss]

Someone mentioned Venezuela.

 

Drink!