csyphrett Posted August 31, 2017 Report Share Posted August 31, 2017 Do you mean Bush for Katrina, or Obama for Sandy? Both have been maligned by the hard core right for various reasons. And Trump's reaction to Harvey was superior to Bush's belated and labored response to Katrina. Some of the things going around the net blame Katrina on Obama. The fact that he wasn't in office doesn't seem to cross their mind. CES Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
megaplayboy Posted August 31, 2017 Report Share Posted August 31, 2017 Some of the things going around the net blame Katrina on Obama. The fact that he wasn't in office doesn't seem to cross their mind. CES I guess they figured, since he can obviously travel back in time to forge his birth certificate, why couldn't he go back and warn Bush about Katrina? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tech priest support Posted August 31, 2017 Report Share Posted August 31, 2017 Speaking of hurricane Harvey the american right wasted no time in blaming it on the usual targets, teh gayzes and abortion rights. http://deepstatenation.com/americas-most-christian-coach-blames-hurricane-harvey-on-gays-and-abortion-video/ Far right spokesthing Ann Coulter excreted this comment: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/ann-coulter-hurricane-harvey_us_59a59bc2e4b084581a139315 People wonder why I scream and cry in the darkest hours of the night... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Liaden Posted August 31, 2017 Report Share Posted August 31, 2017 People wonder why I scream and cry in the darkest hours of the night... Looking at your avatar, I really don't. Pattern Ghost and Pariah 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nolgroth Posted August 31, 2017 Report Share Posted August 31, 2017 I guess they figured, since he can obviously travel back in time to forge his birth certificate, why couldn't he go back and warn Bush about Katrina? I blame the Mandela Effect. I've even experienced it, to whit... From Wikipedia... The Oklahoma City bombing was a domestic terrorist truck bombing on the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in downtown Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, United States on April 19, 1995... The thing is, I was in the Army during that time frame and I clearly remember driving home from college courses when I heard the news. The song Lightning Crashes was played as some sort of tribute/coping mechanism on the radio. Lightning Crashes wasn't released until 1994. I went to college in 1992 and this event is what spurred me to join the frickin' Army in 1993. Obviously the dates are the dates and somehow I am misremembering the events somehow, but my memory is rock solid in regards to the cause/effect this event had on my decision. My recollection is so strong, in fact, that it is hard for me to picture not having crossed over into an alternate reality. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nolgroth Posted August 31, 2017 Report Share Posted August 31, 2017 People wonder why I scream and cry in the darkest hours of the night... We all cope with ignorance in our own ways. I, for instance, laugh bitterly and point at the idiots on parade. Not that I would always agree with you on who is ignorant, of course, but I think we can agree that the guy in the first link you posted is bonkers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wcw43921 Posted August 31, 2017 Report Share Posted August 31, 2017 Here's something to consider about politics in america. A large number of republicans are claiming trump's reaction to hurricane Harvey is far superior to president Obama's reaction to hurricane Katrina. That's not a joke. I....need to go scream and weep for a while, folks. That's not the worst lie being spread around. . . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DasBroot Posted August 31, 2017 Report Share Posted August 31, 2017 That will work nicely, despite the snow on the ground: black people, wet roads, emergency crews, headline -- good enough. Time to get some clickbait revenue. I wish debunking headlines travelled as far as the lies they are forced to debunk... but that's human nature. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sociotard Posted August 31, 2017 Report Share Posted August 31, 2017 Isn't "meeting with victims" just camera mugging for politicians? Get a good photo without helping much. Meh. I'll save my outrage a little longer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Liaden Posted August 31, 2017 Report Share Posted August 31, 2017 Looking at films of some recent presidents trying to comfort victims one-on-one, it certainly looks like the victims welcome the human compassion. It (usually) seems to move the politician, as well. While public relations is definitely a big part of why politicians do that, I believe it does tend to foster a stronger sense of emotional support from leader to public. That's not a bad thing when folks are suffering. Twilight, wcw43921, Joe Walsh and 2 others 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nolgroth Posted August 31, 2017 Report Share Posted August 31, 2017 I also think that, for all but the most jaded and cynical of us, having an elected leader on the ground is a powerful symbol that leadership acknowledges the problem and an implied comfort that they will do something to fix that. The jaded among us wonder how much money will eventually line that politician's pocket when all is said and done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nolgroth Posted August 31, 2017 Report Share Posted August 31, 2017 That's not the worst lie being spread around. . . Gah. It's bad enough that a major catastrophe hits. Do these jacktards use this as an opportunity to come together and do some good? Nope. They sail right into the storm of racist stupidity. Great job guys. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cancer Posted August 31, 2017 Report Share Posted August 31, 2017 This is cheap shot, but it is from Science... Daniel Kammen, an energy researcher at the University of California, Berkeley, has stepped down as the U.S. Department of State’s science envoy after 7 years on the job, Time reports. Kammen wrote that he’s calling it quits in response to President Donald Trump’s “attacks on the core values of the United States,” citing the administration’s decision to pull out of the Paris climate agreement and a failure to condemn white supremacists in the wake of the Charlottesville, Virginia, protests. Hidden in Kammen’s resignation letter may be a secret message: Together, the first letters of each paragraph spell out the word “impeach.” Netzilla, Old Man, Twilight and 2 others 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pariah Posted August 31, 2017 Report Share Posted August 31, 2017 I disagree. That's not a cheap shot. That's awesome. aylwin13, Old Man and Iuz the Evil 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iuz the Evil Posted August 31, 2017 Report Share Posted August 31, 2017 This is cheap shot, but it is from Science... That's fantastic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Walsh Posted August 31, 2017 Report Share Posted August 31, 2017 And yet, there are still plenty of people who support President Trump. Enough to gain him some seats in Congress? Maybe. WINCHESTER, Ind. — The worker's message for Sen. Joe Donnelly was blunt: "President Trump, I think, has got a long road ahead of him," he said, "and I hope you can back him on some things, because I think he has the country's best interest at heart." Donnelly assured the man that he is working with Trump on creating jobs and combating opioid abuse. Looking out on the construction of a railroad underpass in this rural heartland town, he said, "Anywhere we've got some common-sense stuff, count me in." "I hope so," said the worker, who declined to give his name to a reporter. "Because if not, then I'm going to be voting for someone else." It's a message that Donnelly, a burly Indiana Democrat, is hearing a lot this year. And it's one that he and other Democrats seeking reelection next year in states that Trump won are responding to in a way that puts them at odds with the leadership and base of their own party: by promising to work with this president. From this article. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pariah Posted August 31, 2017 Report Share Posted August 31, 2017 Wizard's First Rule in action, I suppose. Iuz the Evil 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DShomshak Posted September 1, 2017 Report Share Posted September 1, 2017 Looked up "Rights" in Scruton's A Dictionary of Political Thought. (Topic is a bit late, but whatever.) Scruton concludes that nobody has adequately defined "Rights," so it's probably a primary concept -- one you use to define other things, but impossible to define itself without going circular. He does mention, however, that legal philosophers list it among fundamental "jural relations." I didn't understand the entry for that, but the key word, I think, is "relations." A right cannot exist without other people. If you are alone on a desert island, you have no rights in any meaningful sense because there is no one else to respect them or infringe them. So no, you do not have the right to believe what you want in the privacy of your own head. Until that belief is expressed or acted upon or in some way leads to interaction with other people, "right" is an irrelevant term. "Natural rights" is even slipperier. These are rights that any reasonable person must concede in order for a society to exist. Like, the right to life: If anyone can be killed by anyone else at any time, you won't have a functioning society. Property is another: The bounds of personal property, family property or community property can vary from culture to culture, but everyone grants the basic truth that some stuff is yours, or your groups, and other people can legitimately use it only with your permission. But how do you define a reasonable person? Next, unless I am asked to refrain: What is socialism, really? Dean Shomshak Doc Democracy 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iuz the Evil Posted September 1, 2017 Report Share Posted September 1, 2017 Socialism is a range of economic and social systems characterised by social ownership and democratic control of the means of production, as well as the political theories, and movements associated with them. So, like we do here in the United States actually in many respects. We are a blended system, neither fully capitalist nor entirely socialist. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
megaplayboy Posted September 1, 2017 Report Share Posted September 1, 2017 Socialism is a range of economic and social systems characterised by social ownership and democratic control of the means of production, as well as the political theories, and movements associated with them. So, like we do here in the United States actually in many respects. We are a blended system, neither fully capitalist nor entirely socialist. I believe we'd be Social Democrats in Europe, not Democratic Socialists. "Natural rights" and "natural law" are an interesting conundrum. Because, in a state of nature, there is no "individual". From the earliest, humans collected together for survival and mutual assistance. Personal property wasn't really a thing, until the advent of agriculture. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iuz the Evil Posted September 1, 2017 Report Share Posted September 1, 2017 I believe we'd be Social Democrats in Europe, not Democratic Socialists. Tomato, tomahto. Neither system exists in a pure state, but yes we are slightly further removed from a pure socialist model. There are many aspects of commerce and production controlled to one extent or another by the state here, in some cases for instances of national security or domestic economic interest. Intent aside, there's no real question we have adopted socialist elements in our economy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
megaplayboy Posted September 1, 2017 Report Share Posted September 1, 2017 Tomato, tomahto. Neither system exists in a pure state, but yes we are slightly further removed from a pure socialist model. There are many aspects of commerce and production controlled to one extent or another by the state here, in some cases for instances of national security or domestic economic interest. Intent aside, there's no real question we have adopted socialist elements in our economy. Sure, since at least the 1930s that's been the case. Iuz the Evil 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucius Posted September 1, 2017 Report Share Posted September 1, 2017 Personal property wasn't really a thing, until the advent of agriculture. I doubt that to be the case, and even if it is, how would one prove it? Lucius Alexander I would suggest time travel but the palindromedary says there's no future in it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Liaden Posted September 1, 2017 Report Share Posted September 1, 2017 The Preamble to the American Declaration of Independence asserts that there are human rights which are "self-evident" and "inalienable." However one may debate the nature of "rights," judicially, linguistically, or philosophically, the power of that assertion has probably been a driving force in efforts to create a more just society around the world, for over two hundred years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
megaplayboy Posted September 1, 2017 Report Share Posted September 1, 2017 I doubt that to be the case, and even if it is, how would one prove it? Lucius Alexander I would suggest time travel but the palindromedary says there's no future in it. I should be more specific, I guess. The elaborate systems of inheritance, property rights, etc. that we have mostly flow from the advent of agriculture and domestication of livestock. Before then, land didn't have much value. Sure, Thag could say "No touch spear, that Thag spear", but that was about the extent of it. In a small community of 50-150 members of a hunter-gatherer society, personal selfishness would be an unaffordable luxury. If someone was sick or injured and unable to help hunt or gather, those who did shared some of their food with them. If they didn't, who would do it for them when they were sick or injured? We know this in part because there are still a handful of such societies in existence. Empathy, not selfishness, is what kept humans alive, and community awareness was how civilization developed. Individualism was a relatively late development in the evolution of modern humans. L. Marcus 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.