Political Discussion Thread (With Rules)

[Nolgroth]

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

 

I disagree. Refusing to look critically at whatever side you choose, empowers it to be the one willing to be worse.

[Iuz the Evil]

I disagree. Refusing to look critically at whatever side you choose, empowers it to be the one willing to be worse.

Those positions are not mutually exclusive. I can look critically at the negative behaviors exhibited by both sides, and come to the conclusion that one has had worse behavior. YMMV

[megaplayboy]

I disagree. Refusing to look critically at whatever side you choose, empowers it to be the one willing to be worse.

 

I didn't say one side should be free from criticism.  I said, it's entirely possible that while both sides do it, one side might in fact be significantly worse.  In fact, it not only seems possible, it seems likely.  And not being "pure" does not mean that one side may not criticize the other from a position of relatively higher ground.  I reject that in its entirety.  Voters making such a call about the relative misconduct of the two parties is in fact one of the few ways to check such misconduct.  

[Tech priest support]

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.

OK, Venezuela was mentioned and I have to respond.

 

It is true that Venezuela apopted extremely repressive laws and policies regarding open dissent and criticism of the government and I don't like what they did. However, there is more to the story than just that one issue, big as it might be.

 

After ww2 america went full blown paranoid over the "red menace", which replaced our earlier enemy, fascism, which replaced our previous bogeyman, "the yellow peril".

 

America and to an extent england appointed themselves the world's official anti communist police and granted themselves the power to attack and destroy any government they determined to be insufficiently anti communist. Note that the definitely of "communist" was "not compliant and submissive to western corporations wishes."

 

An early incident was when the nation of guatamela elected a government that decided its country would no longer be a plantation to an American corporation called United fruit, which had been treating the guatamalen people as nothing but cheap labor for them.

 

America's response to a democratically electedgovernmernt in guatamala that introduced universal voting rights and minimum wage laws? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1954_Guatemalan_coup_d%27%C3%A9tat

 

Also in the 50's Iran elected a government the decided to use the oil wealth it had for the country as a whole and wasn't cometely submissive to Americans oil corporations. The result was "Operation bulldog" where america and the UK overthrew the government the Iranian people elected and installed the shah, one of the most brutal dictators in the 20th century who tortured and murder countless Iranians. His regime was so horrible the people were willing to try anything to dispose him, resulting in Iran being taken over by an islamofascist government.

 

Nixon deposing the democratically elected government of Chile' and the consequences of Pinochet's regime for the Chilean people are well known.

 

Somewhat does all this have to do with Venezuela? Well, it makes it clear america had a clear pattern of ignoring other country's wishes and forcibly replacing democratically elected governments with brutal, oppressive dictators who were favorably regarded by american corporations, especially oil and produce corporations.

 

So when Venezuela decided it wasn't going to be an American oil corproation owned and operated subsidiary, it was naturally targeted by American powers for "some democracy".

 

The Venezuelan government was well aware of how america's government regarded the opinions of countries that disagreed with it's coprostions. So they knew every attempt would be made to "destabilize" it.

 

While I don't approve of Venezuela's laws on oppressing and punishing dissent, I can understand their perspective, and such dissent was likely manufactured and distributed by the CIA not for the Venezuelan people but for american oil corporations who wanted to control the country's oil resources.

 

Also remember that what we hear about the conditions in Venezuela are mostly filtered thru american media that is largely controlled by american corporations.

 

I may be accused of being pro communist by saying this, and I know that. For the record I consider myself not to be pro communist but pro truth.

[Joe Walsh]

I hadn't realized how many TG individuals are estimated to be in the military! And now the conservative groups who were advocating for a change in policy are saying they didn't want this total ban. Very interesting!

[Michael Hopcroft]

I hadn't realized how many TG individuals are estimated to be in the military! And now the conservative groups who were advocating for a change in policy are saying they didn't want this total ban. Very interesting!

When I had a friend (and former GM) tell me she was Transgender, I didn't know how to react. I really didn't. I respected her, and the choices she made, but I'm still not used to using feminine pronouns to describe her. She's too old and too ill for the military (she gas severe epilepsy), but the notion that she's connsidrered a second-class citizen is alarming.

 

And that's exactly what Trump is doing -- saying that TG people aren't real Americans. Just like in his view Muslims arent real Americans, and how the Justice Department is now claiming that nobody in the LGBTQ community is a real American (the Attorney General is using a nit-picky interpretation of civil rights law to claim that they are not protected from discrimination the way other minorities are). 

[Joe Walsh]

When I had a friend (and former GM) tell me she was Transgender, I didn't know how to react. I really didn't. I respected her, and the choices she made, but I'm still not used to using feminine pronouns to describe her. She's too old and too ill for the military (she gas severe epilepsy), but the notion that she's connsidrered a second-class citizen is alarming.

 

And that's exactly what Trump is doing -- saying that TG people aren't real Americans. Just like in his view Muslims arent real Americans, and how the Justice Department is now claiming that nobody in the LGBTQ community is a real American (the Attorney General is using a nit-picky interpretation of civil rights law to claim that they are not protected from discrimination the way other minorities are). 

 

They'll do that to as many groups as they can get away with. It's how these people think, how their base thinks, and it's very helpful to have lots of handy groups to direct people's hatred toward.

 

Your story about your friend is striking. That must have been rough, for both you and her. The courage it must have taken!

 

I was born and raised in the SF Bay Area, so what's alien to me is different than what's alien to a lot of other people, and I understand that. What's strange to me is things like the idea that gay marriage is harmful -- or anyone else's business, really.  I sort of understand being uncomfortable about the TG bathroom thing, but really it seems like something we could get used to, like having mixed races using the same bathrooms and drinking fountains. I'll bet we could even get comfortable with unisex bathrooms being the norm. If everyone's using a stall, what's the big deal?

 

I understand being uncomfortable in unusual situations, like you with your friend. You'd never been in anything like that situation before, so it's harder to navigate. I've been in a few unusual situations over the years that opened my eyes to what it's like for others. I was one of the few white kids in a school I went to for a couple of years, and I was the only male at a birthday party for one of my wife's college friends who had come out as a lesbian. It can be really uncomfortable to be the odd one out, especially at first.

 

It sure would be nice if everyone could meet a more diverse group of people, and get familiar with a more diverse set of circumstances. I guess that's why cities tend to be so much more liberal.

[Joe Walsh]

BTW, on the minority scapegoats thing:

http://www.theonion.com/article/trump-administration-worried-president-burning-thr-56489

 

[Iuz the Evil]

BTW, on the minority scapegoats thing:

http://www.theonion.com/article/trump-administration-worried-president-burning-thr-56489

 

Hah! Perfect

[st barbara]

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.

That seems to be exactly how Trump operates. Come up with a plan that he (and his cronies) KNOW is going to hurt a lot of people (such as health care) then, while it is being debated, say something outrageous to distract the media and critics while you get it enacted.

[Old Man]

95% of Senate Republicans vote to defund CDC and Planned Parenthood, kick 15 million people off of health insurance, and trigger Obamacare death spiral in dead of night Senate vote with no public debate

[Tech priest support]

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.

A look at human history shows that violence has always been a valid political tool thuout history. The american revolution was not bloodless. The French revolution against a callous and oppressive aristocracy was not bloodless. The actions necessary to stop fascism from dominating much of the world were far from bloodless.

 

Some claim violence is always wrong. Sometimes the only way to stop an intolerable wrong is with violence. I learned that from personal experience. My half brother was 5 years older than me and was raised by my grandparents. My maternal grandparents only had my mother and my grandfather had wanted a son. My mother had my half brother under bad circumstances so she let my grandfather adopt him.

 

This condemned my half brother to hell.

 

He was raised around d my grandmother, aka "the mouth from hell". Where a human being would have a mouth she had a constantly open portal from hell with which she tortured everyone around her.

 

Being subjected to her constant bitching, nagging, screaming and literal torture from her mouth drove my half brother utterly and hopelessly insane. And yes my grandmother tortured people with her mouth. Any time she knew someone had a little hope or happiness she just had to open her mouth and let fly with anything she could say that would kill it. If she knew someone was sad, angry, feeling bad, etc her whole face would light up in joy and she'd just start gleefully spewing out every word she could to make them feel worse, and you could tell from her face and voice she just absolutely loved every bit of extra misery she could force on someone.

 

There were times my half brother would finally just throw his hands over his ears, double over and scream in agony just from the constant torture she inflicted on him with her evil mouth. Her inevitable response would be to waddle up to it, dial her huge, horrible mouth up to like 20, and blast thru its hands to get to its ears. If you can imagine a young teenage boy on the floor, in fetal position, with its hands over his ears, screaming in agony while a hateful old she demon just bent over him and screamed down at him at the top of her evil lungs with hate, pure hate, just blazing from her face and mouth, that was what my half brother's life was like.

 

And yes, my grandmother just lived to violate other people, to force them to hear things she knew they did not want to hear. The instant someone refused to "just listen" she would just explode at them in pure, vicious, demonic hatred.

 

Well, butchie couldn't do anything to stop her torture of him but be started taking it out on me. I was 5 years younger than it (yes, I refer to my half brother as an "it" because it was turned into a mindless, sadistic animal by my grandmother) and my mom kept me due to better circumstances.

 

Every chance it got it would torment and torture me. It hated me because I wasn't the one who got condemned to the hell of being around my evil grandmother. It was bigger so it could physically abuse me and it did. Finally after a lifetime if being tormented by it,I was big enough to fight back. And for once I hurt it a lot more that it hurt me.

 

It never attacked or abused me again physically. After nearly 20 years of being abused and terrorized by thast mindless animal, who I used to pity but not any more, I was able to effectively use violence against it rather than be e victim of its violence.

 

Yes it tried every little petty sadistic torment it could against me after that, from a safe distance, that but it never physically attacked me again. It knew if it did I would kill it.

 

So it took violence to free me from my half brother's constant torment and abuse.

 

Like it or not, whether it's "right or wrong"or not, on occasion vilolence is the only effective solution to an intolerable problem. Over 6,000 years of human recorded history pretty much establishes that in all too many cases your only choice it to use violence against someone attacking you or be the victim of it.

 

I do not support aggressive violence, however violence in the defence of yourself or others in often necessary. At that point right or wrong cease to matter. As I have learned from from long, bitter experience.

[Joe Walsh]

John McCain didn't cave like he usually does! I'm surprised and happy.

 

All those Republican Senators saying the "skinny repeal" bill was terrible turned around and voted for it like the cowards they are. But not John McCain! He made Mitch cry, and I'm very happy he did so.

[megaplayboy]

I'm beginning to suspect that the majority party is shockingly incapable of the basic duties of governance.

[Lord Liaden]

A look at human history shows that violence has always been a valid political tool thuout history. The american revolution was not bloodless. The French revolution against a callous and oppressive aristocracy was not bloodless. The actions necessary to stop fascism from dominating much of the world were far from bloodless.

 

Absolutely true. But for most of the population of the United States (not counting those serving in conflicts overseas), their country is at peace. Moreover, it's supposed to be a country where the rule of law is supreme; where venues exist through which all citizens may receive justice; where the actions of government are open to scrutiny, and the public may pass judgement on whether a government deserves to continue. Under those circumstances, for a significant number of citizens to openly advocate violence to force change, shows the degree to which the governing system has failed to win public faith in its competence and inherent fairness.

[Nolgroth]

I didn't say one side should be free from criticism.  I said, it's entirely possible that while both sides do it, one side might in fact be significantly worse.  In fact, it not only seems possible, it seems likely.  And not being "pure" does not mean that one side may not criticize the other from a position of relatively higher ground.  I reject that in its entirety.  Voters making such a call about the relative misconduct of the two parties is in fact one of the few ways to check such misconduct.  

 

Really, because I never mentioned anybody as pure. I was condemning the whole argument that one side is purer than the other. They are not. Specifically, I was ridiculing the whole concept that a whack job shooter inspired by political rhetoric on one side is somehow less bad than one spawned from the other side. Whack job killers are bad no matter which side you are on. Further, both sides employ the same tactics of filibustering, rushed voting and so on. I am not, nor will I ever, give either side a free pass when it comes to that.

 

Ultimately, I think you and I arguing the same point, but I also think we are coming at it from different angles. We may just be talking past each other as well. I'll just shrug and go back to reading Dresden Files Accelerated. Far more entertaining than the clown show going on in Washington anyway. I mean seriously, could the Republicans (of which I am registered as) be any more like the Keystone Cops? How many times have they ran around in circles, crashing into each other, in failed attempt after failed attempt to repeal Obamacare? As much as I am against the thought, maybe they all need to be relieved of duty at the next election. Perhaps that will give them time to learn organization, bargaining, and good governing skills. Sheesh. It's embarrassing. 

[aylwin13]

Do we have to wait for the next election? Can't we just relieve them all now?

[Joe Walsh]

The #1 thing we can do to get better governance would be to make our state governments draw district maps so as to make as many districts competitive as possible. That way the Primary challenge doesn't become the...uh...primary challenge to incumbents. If all they have to do is worry about someone even more doctrinaire coming along and defeating them, then they're gonna be pretty inflexible. But if they have to worry about the general election as well, they'll tend to be a lot more interested in getting things done.

 

Yes, that means laws will be more centrist rather than from the hard right or hard left, but that seems a lot better than this to me.

[Sociotard]

Reince Priebus is no longer chief of Staff. Mr. Kelley of Homeland Security will take his place.

 

That seems really fast for a chief of staff.

[Joe Walsh]

And the drama continues: Reince Priebus is out. (Announced via tweet, of course.)

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2017/07/28/white-house-chief-of-staff-reince-priebus-will-be-replaced-by-homeland-security-secretary-john-f-kelly-trump-says/?tid=a_breakingnews&utm_term=.85eb9a3c376a

 

Edited to add: D'oh! Ninja'd by Sociotard.

 

I kinda wish the replacement's name had been autocorrected to Kerry, just for the reaction that would have gotten amongst the partisans.

[Nolgroth]

Do we have to wait for the next election? Can't we just relieve them all now?

I don't think anyone wants to set that precedence.

[Sociotard]

[Ranxerox]

DoJ Says Federal Anti-Discrimination Law Does Not Protect LBGTs

[Lord Liaden]

So, the White House has been taken over by ego-driven rivalries, dysfunctional relationships, and foul language, starring the Donald and the Mooch. In other words, the cast of Jersey Shore.

[Michael Hopcroft]

DoJ Says Federal Anti-Discrimination Law Does Not Protect LBGTs

This has been on the right-wing wish list for some time. Although the ideas of LGBTQ being treatable mental illnesses has been thoroughly discredited in psychiatry, they have been embraced wholeheartedly by the religious right. I'm seeing a lot of memes on that subject, which get into my newsfeed because one of my friends wants to critique them and bash their ideas. Sadly, this means I have to actually see them, and I'd really rather not be poisoned by that kind of rhetoric.