IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 3rd September 2022, 08:22 AM   #1
arayder
Master Poster
 
arayder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 2,882
Yeah, I'm a yellow dog except for. . . .

Do you have any political positions or beliefs which are typically thought to be in line those of a political party or belief system vastly different from yours?

Is the question irrelevant in that you "toe the party line" in all, or most all, cases?

Is the question irrelevant because you have adopted a pragmatic approach which values concrete action over theoretical discussion?

Do you have any examples of politicians or community leaders embracing such a pragmatic point of view?
arayder is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd September 2022, 09:34 AM   #2
Gord_in_Toronto
Penultimate Amazing
 
Gord_in_Toronto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 22,920
Originally Posted by arayder View Post
Do you have any political positions or beliefs which are typically thought to be in line those of a political party or belief system vastly different from yours?

Is the question irrelevant in that you "toe the party line" in all, or most all, cases?

Is the question irrelevant because you have adopted a pragmatic approach which values concrete action over theoretical discussion?

Do you have any examples of politicians or community leaders embracing such a pragmatic point of view?
The first (and only) one who comes to my mind is S. I. HayakawaWP who I remember (though it's not in the Wiki) of answering a question at a press conference with, "i don't know." Possibly the only politician ever to say that.
__________________
"Reality is what's left when you cease to believe." Philip K. Dick
Gord_in_Toronto is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd September 2022, 09:54 AM   #3
Ladewig
I lost an avatar bet.
 
Ladewig's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 28,575
For about 24 hours,, Ted Cruz fell into this category
.
In January of this year, he called Jan 6 a violent terrorist attack.
The next day he was cowed into walking it all the way back.
__________________
I lost an avatar bet to Doghouse Reilly.
Ladewig is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd September 2022, 10:02 AM   #4
Ladewig
I lost an avatar bet.
 
Ladewig's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 28,575
Originally Posted by arayder View Post
Do you have any political positions or beliefs which are typically thought to be in line those of a political party or belief system vastly different from yours?

Is the question irrelevant in that you "toe the party line" in all, or most all, cases?

Is the question irrelevant because you have adopted a pragmatic approach which values concrete action over theoretical discussion?
I don’t understand how adopting a pragmatic approach makes the question irrelevant. It is possible that someone might view the opposing party’s view on a pacular issue as being the most pragmatic solution and it is possible that someone believes always following the party line is most pragmatic.


Wouldn’t Liz Cheney be the most recent example of not following the party line? The
__________________
I lost an avatar bet to Doghouse Reilly.
Ladewig is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd September 2022, 10:50 AM   #5
arayder
Master Poster
 
arayder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 2,882
Originally Posted by Ladewig View Post
I don’t understand how adopting a pragmatic approach makes the question irrelevant. It is possible that someone might view the opposing party’s view on a pacular issue as being the most pragmatic solution and it is possible that someone believes always following the party line is most pragmatic.
Right you are. It seems unclear.

I was thinking about people who automatically eschew party allegiances or narrow philosophical approaches. To these folks no political position or belief is automatically vastly different from theirs?

Last edited by arayder; 3rd September 2022 at 11:09 AM.
arayder is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd September 2022, 12:22 PM   #6
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 31,041
I'm pro nuclear power and have been for more than two decades. The Republican party has almost always have been and the Democratic party has been anti-nuclear until recently. The Dems seem to be changing their position on nuclear power. So I'm not as alone as I use to be.
__________________
Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get to me.
.
acbytesla is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd September 2022, 12:58 PM   #7
stanfr
Master Poster
 
stanfr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,256
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
I'm pro nuclear power and have been for more than two decades. The Republican party has almost always have been and the Democratic party has been anti-nuclear until recently. The Dems seem to be changing their position on nuclear power. So I'm not as alone as I use to be.
I am right there, because my father was a nuclear physicist who also taught me to value a clean environment and he explained to me at an early age that nuclear had the potential to be eco-conscious-- if breeder reactors and the like were developed. And that was at a time when the liberals were making all nuclear out to be another love canal or three mile island just lining up to happen. So I was definitely in the minority on the left then.

I personally despise political labels since I think labeling is divisive in principle, but I will admit to be on the progressive liberal side of most issues. However, having worked in government or semi-government jobs most of my life, including my initial career as a public defender and subsequent career working for NOAA, I witnessed first-hand plenty of governmental inefficiency and waste, and social welfare abuses (low income clients who took advantage of social welfare in a negative way) so I am far less defensive of government as a way of solving problems as most of my progressive liberal friends are. Which is not to say I don't see plenty of evils in capitalism too, I just am not ideologically jaded by government effectiveness.

Last edited by stanfr; 3rd September 2022 at 12:59 PM. Reason: grammar
stanfr is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd September 2022, 02:02 PM   #8
dudalb
Penultimate Amazing
 
dudalb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 56,301
Frankly, I have a distrust of anybody who never departs from the Party Line.
Which is why I make a lousy party loyalist.
When it comes to making people mindless zombies, religiious beliefs have nothing on political ideologies.
__________________
Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty.

Robert Heinlein.

Last edited by dudalb; 3rd September 2022 at 02:04 PM.
dudalb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd September 2022, 04:23 PM   #9
Delvo
Дэлво Δελϝο דֶלְבֹֿ देल्वो
 
Delvo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: North Tonawanda, NY
Posts: 10,542
Originally Posted by stanfr View Post
And that was at a time when the liberals were making all nuclear out to be another love canal or three mile island just lining up to happen.
Even using the name "Three-Mile Island" to mean "disaster" is accepting their insane lies about what even happened at Three-Mile Island. In reality, it was practically nothing. The safety system worked, the reactor was shut down, nothing leaked, and nobody got cancer or even one extra mole from it. Half of the site remained working to this day. Life in & around the river that flows by it on both sides, from trees to turtles, goes on just the same as at any other river. People live & work within sight of it and routinely fish in the river without incident. Cronkite's show had a camera crew set up in Harrisburg, asked people to stay out of the shot for a bit while they recorded so the cameras could get a clean view of the background, and used those images to claim that the city was abandoned/deserted. Don't accept the dishonest framing by using the name the way they want us to!
Delvo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd September 2022, 05:04 PM   #10
TheGoldcountry
Philosopher
 
TheGoldcountry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 7,094
Originally Posted by dudalb View Post
Frankly, I have a distrust of anybody who never departs from the Party Line.
Which is why I make a lousy party loyalist.
When it comes to making people mindless zombies, religiious beliefs have nothing on political ideologies.
I've met a lot of people who tell me they're not "religious," only to find out all the various dogmatic ideologies they do adhere to faithfully.

I always think, "you're religious, you're just calling it by another name."

White nationalism is one of those ideologies that whips up a furor in people as though not worshipping the flag was a mortal sin.
__________________
I have no idea what you're trying to say, but I'm still pretty sure that you're wrong. -Akhenaten
I sometimes think the Bible was inspired by Satan to make God look bad. And then it backfired on Him when He underestimated the stupidity of religious ideologues. -MontagK505
TheGoldcountry is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd September 2022, 05:25 PM   #11
stanfr
Master Poster
 
stanfr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,256
Originally Posted by Delvo View Post
Even using the name "Three-Mile Island" to mean "disaster" is accepting their insane lies about what even happened at Three-Mile Island. In reality, it was practically nothing. The safety system worked, the reactor was shut down, nothing leaked, and nobody got cancer or even one extra mole from it. Half of the site remained working to this day. Life in & around the river that flows by it on both sides, from trees to turtles, goes on just the same as at any other river. People live & work within sight of it and routinely fish in the river without incident. Cronkite's show had a camera crew set up in Harrisburg, asked people to stay out of the shot for a bit while they recorded so the cameras could get a clean view of the background, and used those images to claim that the city was abandoned/deserted. Don't accept the dishonest framing by using the name the way they want us to!
Well to be fair they would have preferred to use the name "Chernobyl" but it didn't exist yet at that time
stanfr is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd September 2022, 05:25 PM   #12
Venom
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: United States
Posts: 5,974
I admire liberals and socialists the most.

But with these ideologies often comes a sort of pragmatic dogmatism that all people are equal in every way and all too often I think people regard rule of law, human rights as real things that somehow transcend the system we live under and don't have to be justified and protected.
Venom is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th September 2022, 11:13 AM   #13
arayder
Master Poster
 
arayder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 2,882
Originally Posted by Venom View Post
I admire liberals and socialists the most.

But with these ideologies often comes a sort of pragmatic dogmatism that all people are equal in every way and all too often I think people regard rule of law, human rights as real things that somehow transcend the system we live under and don't have to be justified and protected.
Some parties, groups or political action groups know full well that they'll never get the power that comes from getting an adherent elected.

So they're free to sling all the impractical BS they want. And doing so they reassure that they'll never get power of any sort.

*Wash and repeat*
arayder is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th September 2022, 04:24 PM   #14
gnome
Penultimate Amazing
 
gnome's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 13,314
I am mostly liberal/progressive (how far in either direction varies from issue to issue) but I think that Citizens United was correctly decided. Despite common belief, the decision made no ruling on whether corporations counted as people. The best way to describe it was reinforcing the freedom of the press. I don't think the 1st amendment meant it as a class of citizens called "Journalists" that have extra protection. I think it meant freedom of the printing press.

Short version: that the government may not restrict speech, regardless of the status of its origin as a person, a corporation, or a news agency, or a news agency that is also a corporation. I agree with that.

The alternative, discussed in the decision, was to have the government rule on what counts as journalism vs. private advocacy. The majority decision felt this was unworkable, the dissenters thought it could be done. I agreed with the majority.
__________________


Last edited by gnome; 8th September 2022 at 04:27 PM.
gnome is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th September 2022, 06:43 PM   #15
Delvo
Дэлво Δελϝο דֶלְבֹֿ देल्वो
 
Delvo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: North Tonawanda, NY
Posts: 10,542
In terms of big broad issue categories, I'm with the left on economics, war/peace, drugs, guns, abortion, science/technology, and religiosity, but the big broad category I can't join them on is their bizarre belief that there's something to be gained from badgering others with usually-false accusations of bigotry (whether based on race, sex, sexual orientation, religion, or whatever else). On the rare occasion that the accusation is true, it wouldn't have any effect because people aren't affected by having their actual beliefs described accurately. And in the much more common case that it's false, the only effect you can possibly have is to discredit yourself as a hopeless liar so then people won't listen to you on other subjects where you do have a point, like economics. False accusations about what the accusee supposedly thinks are not just the easiest category of lie to see through, but even worse: the one that it's impossible to ever fail to see through. And on top of that, it tends to come from the same people who display their own bigotry against rural Americans, or against men, or less often against white people or religious people, any of which proves that the person who's dishonestly blathering about other people's fictional bigotry doesn't even actually think real bigotry is bad in the first place.

Aside from that big broad category, I can only think of a scattered few detailed points on which I've disagreed with a lot of other lefties:

1. We need lots more nuclear power now. We need it years ago. We need it decades ago. The objections to it are simply insane and inane.

2. No matter how much one dislikes some aspects of the military system or how it gets used, those objections do not magically make their equipment bad equipment. That's just not how science & technology works. The military hardware which the left has ranted against the most has actually tended to be some of the most impressively effective, and sometimes even most cost-effective, inventions ever invented. (Nothing beats the F-35 for this category, but the funny part of that one is how often the attacks on it amounted to "it's not the F-22", even though they had been claiming that the F-22 was garbage when it was new, too; F-22 became the paragon that other planes would "fail" by being different from, just by not being the newest one to hate on anymore.)

3. Human races exist, and those who pretended they don't already knew it even while they were doing that. (And, back to the first paragraph: admitting this fact isn't racism, and you already knew that when you said it too.) If anybody reading this is newer here, it might seem weird to think that anybody ever pretended to think otherwise, but they really did, often dragging it on for pages & pages & pages on this forum and others, just a few years ago. Why this claim eventually somewhat suddenly disappeared is not clear.

4. A massive air strike on North Korea's artillery within range of Seoul would be not only possible and effective, but also a good policy decision. It would end the giant hostage situation which is their only bargaining chip/threat against any other country. And the longer we wait, the closer we get to a time when they can finally really use a certain other big bargaining chip/threat which we all know they've been working on.

* * *

I have no idea how the "dog" color code is supposed to work.

Last edited by Delvo; 8th September 2022 at 07:38 PM.
Delvo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th September 2022, 07:28 PM   #16
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Antimemetics Division
Posts: 61,471
I guess I dissent from just about everyone on the morality of using accurate, low yield nuclear weapons on extremely important and very hard targets.
__________________
There is no Antimemetics Division.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th September 2022, 07:35 PM   #17
Stellafane
Village Idiot.
 
Stellafane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 8,248
I too am in favor of nuclear power. And my enthusiasm for capitalism falls just short of laissez-faire.

In other areas, I'd probably be classified as liberal, if such a label has any meaning anymore.
__________________
"Stellafane! My old partner in crime!" - Kelly J

Last edited by Stellafane; 8th September 2022 at 07:37 PM.
Stellafane is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th September 2022, 05:02 AM   #18
arayder
Master Poster
 
arayder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 2,882
I am an old style liberal in most ways. But I am skeptical about the effectiveness of the usual gun control proposals and I favor a strong military presence over seas. I support the latter in the belief that keeping overseas trade routes open and freely traveled are a necessity for our country.

Like it or not, we are a capitalist nation.
arayder is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th September 2022, 07:47 AM   #19
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 104,591
Originally Posted by arayder View Post
Do you have any political positions or beliefs which are typically thought to be in line those of a political party or belief system vastly different from yours?

..snip..
Back in the 1980s I went on many a march and protest against the USA basing nuclear cruise missiles in the UK. Pretty much everyone was against nuclear weapons and wanted to get rid of them all. I was only against the USA ones in my country not under the control of my country, I wasn’t against nuclear weapons. Had many ..er… shall we say heated discussion and debate about that.
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th September 2022, 10:29 AM   #20
Brainster
Penultimate Amazing
 
Brainster's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 19,193
Originally Posted by Delvo View Post
I have no idea how the "dog" color code is supposed to work.
The statement, "I'd vote for a yellow dog before I'd vote for a Republican," was quite popular among Southern whites following Reconstruction.
__________________
My new blog: Recent Reads.
1960s Comic Book Nostalgia
Visit the Screw Loose Change blog.
Brainster is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th September 2022, 01:19 PM   #21
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
 
TragicMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Monkey
Posts: 63,921
Originally Posted by arayder View Post
I am an old style liberal in most ways. But I am skeptical about the effectiveness of the usual gun control proposals and I favor a strong military presence over seas. I support the latter in the belief that keeping overseas trade routes open and freely traveled are a necessity for our country.

Like it or not, we are a capitalist nation.
I am very similar.

I remember during Hillary Clinton's stabs at the presidency her perceived hawkishness was brought up as being a negative thing; to me it was one of the few things I liked about her.
__________________
You added nothing to that conversation, Barbara.
TragicMonkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th September 2022, 03:12 PM   #22
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Antimemetics Division
Posts: 61,471
There was a time, in 2016, when I was planning to vote for Hillary Clinton. Partisan bias aside, I figured she was at least an experienced and competent politician and diplomat, and that her network in the political establishment would be an asset for the presidency. Certainly a better option than the corrupt, amateur hour clown that was running against her. Democrat or not, I felt she was the better candidate.
__________________
There is no Antimemetics Division.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th September 2022, 03:40 PM   #23
bruto
Penultimate Amazing
 
bruto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Way way north of Diddy Wah Diddy
Posts: 32,992
I'm a pretty partisan Democrat in policy areas, but have voted R a few times over the years. Here in Vermont, I voted last time for Phil Scott, a Republican with whose social policies I don't always agree, because he is a competent, tolerant leader in a very bipartisan state, a hater of Trump and a supporter of sane science and voting rights. I'm not entirely sure I'll vote for him again this year, but it might depend on circumstances. I voted a time or two for Jim Jeffords when he was still a Republican, because he was a good guy. Back in Connecticut I voted for Lowell Weicker against Toby Moffett for Senate, even though I had liked Moffett and had even campaigned for him as a representative. But I didn't like Moffett's campaigning style when he went for Senate, and Weicker was, even if more conservative than I might like, honest and qualified, and I generally liked his attitude. Like Jeffords, he later became independent, but he was a Republican when I voted for him.

These days it's pretty hard to find anyone who admits to being a Republican who does not, peripherally, endorse ideas and practices that I despise, but I'm at least willing to listen.
__________________
I love this world, but not for its answers. (Mary Oliver)

"There is another world, but it's in this one." (Paul Eluard)
bruto is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th September 2022, 12:54 PM   #24
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 52,865
Originally Posted by gnome View Post
I am mostly liberal/progressive (how far in either direction varies from issue to issue) but I think that Citizens United was correctly decided. Despite common belief, the decision made no ruling on whether corporations counted as people. The best way to describe it was reinforcing the freedom of the press. I don't think the 1st amendment meant it as a class of citizens called "Journalists" that have extra protection. I think it meant freedom of the printing press.

Short version: that the government may not restrict speech, regardless of the status of its origin as a person, a corporation, or a news agency, or a news agency that is also a corporation. I agree with that.

The alternative, discussed in the decision, was to have the government rule on what counts as journalism vs. private advocacy. The majority decision felt this was unworkable, the dissenters thought it could be done. I agreed with the majority.
Hence the constitutional right to unlimited political dark money.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th September 2022, 12:57 PM   #25
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 52,865
Originally Posted by Delvo View Post
In terms of big broad issue categories, I'm with the left on economics, war/peace, drugs, guns, abortion, science/technology, and religiosity, but the big broad category I can't join them on is their bizarre belief that there's something to be gained from badgering others with usually-false accusations of bigotry (whether based on race, sex, sexual orientation, religion, or whatever else). On the rare occasion that the accusation is true, it wouldn't have any effect because people aren't affected by having their actual beliefs described accurately.
Hence why homes owned by a black person are only worth half of what it would be if owned by a white person and there is nothing racist about any of that. No racism involved, just like blacks make terrible drivers just see how often they get pulled over. To suggest that racism is involved in the disparity of rates of being pulled over is deeply offensive and unrealistic.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th September 2022, 02:32 PM   #26
gnome
Penultimate Amazing
 
gnome's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 13,314
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
There was a time, in 2016, when I was planning to vote for Hillary Clinton. Partisan bias aside, I figured she was at least an experienced and competent politician and diplomat, and that her network in the political establishment would be an asset for the presidency. Certainly a better option than the corrupt, amateur hour clown that was running against her. Democrat or not, I felt she was the better candidate.
Feel free to decline to answer, as I consider one's voting choices private and you can share only as much as you care to. But from your phrasing it sounds like you changed your mind before you voted. I am curious what happened instead.
__________________

gnome is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th September 2022, 02:35 PM   #27
gnome
Penultimate Amazing
 
gnome's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 13,314
Originally Posted by ponderingturtle View Post
Hence the constitutional right to unlimited political dark money.
I think you've mistaken my opinion. Ways of removing "dark money" or any other kind of excessive money from campaigns is of interest to me. I am unwilling to allow the government to weaken the 1st amendment in pursuit of that. Other solutions are welcome as a proposal.
__________________

gnome is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th September 2022, 06:13 PM   #28
Brainster
Penultimate Amazing
 
Brainster's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 19,193
Since I've already announced I'm voting D this year virtually straight-ticket, I sure can't claim to be a yellow-dog Republican. I don't really fit in anywhere these days. There is a certain truth to the observation that what the GOP stands for these days is pwning the libs; put more generously it's trying to put the brakes on the latest crazy fad they have come up with with their "critical" thinking.

But I'm supposed to be pointing out my unorthodox thoughts not the orthodox, so here are three:

1. Generally think abortion is immoral but not so obviously immoral at early points in the pregnancy that the government should be involved in the decision until a certain time period has passed, say 15-20 weeks as is common in Europe.

2. I believe there should be reparations not for slavery, but for segregation and red-lining that people living today were affected by, and not only in the South. Glendale, California was a sundown town, and the Midwest had lots of them. And where there was not de jure segregation there was de facto segregation via steering and redlining.

3. Don't believe there's a lot of bang left in tax cuts at the federal level. The marginal rates are low enough that you don't have a lot of market-distorting deals done solely to dodge the IRS.
__________________
My new blog: Recent Reads.
1960s Comic Book Nostalgia
Visit the Screw Loose Change blog.

Last edited by Brainster; 12th September 2022 at 06:16 PM.
Brainster is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th September 2022, 09:26 PM   #29
gnome
Penultimate Amazing
 
gnome's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 13,314
Originally Posted by Brainster View Post
put more generously it's trying to put the brakes on the latest crazy fad they have come up with with their "critical" thinking.
I think it's implied that this isn't the place to hash out these opinions, so in that spirit I don't plan on making an argument of it, but I am interested what you mean by critical thinking here.
__________________

gnome is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th September 2022, 09:33 PM   #30
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Antimemetics Division
Posts: 61,471
Originally Posted by gnome View Post
Feel free to decline to answer, as I consider one's voting choices private and you can share only as much as you care to. But from your phrasing it sounds like you changed your mind before you voted. I am curious what happened instead.
The mail server. As an IT professional the mail server, the way she, the government, and the media handled it was and is unacceptably offensive to me. I cannot imagine a more perfect Chinese intelligence operation, than the arrangement everyone on the left seems committed to playing off as business as usual. If that's the state of our political establishment then I'd rather vote "outside the box" than ensure continuance of government.
__________________
There is no Antimemetics Division.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th September 2022, 05:58 AM   #31
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 52,865
Originally Posted by gnome View Post
I think you've mistaken my opinion. Ways of removing "dark money" or any other kind of excessive money from campaigns is of interest to me. I am unwilling to allow the government to weaken the 1st amendment in pursuit of that. Other solutions are welcome as a proposal.
But money is speech and you can not limit it in that fashion. It is intrinsic to how you framed your support. About the only thing that would fly in your view of the first amendment is if the money is anonymous.

Hell why shouldn't foreign governments run political adds, that is free speech and they are an organization entitled to their own opinions after all.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th September 2022, 08:24 AM   #32
Brainster
Penultimate Amazing
 
Brainster's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 19,193
Originally Posted by gnome View Post
I think it's implied that this isn't the place to hash out these opinions, so in that spirit I don't plan on making an argument of it, but I am interested what you mean by critical thinking here.
Critical thinking was the wrong term; I meant critical theory:

Quote:
A critical theory is any approach to social philosophy that focuses on reflective assessment and critique of society and culture to reveal and challenge power structures. With roots in sociology and literary criticism, it argues that social problems stem more from social structures and cultural assumptions than from individuals. It argues that ideology is the principal obstacle to human liberation. Critical theory finds applications in various fields of study, including psychology, sociology, history, communication theory, philosophy and feminist theory.
__________________
My new blog: Recent Reads.
1960s Comic Book Nostalgia
Visit the Screw Loose Change blog.
Brainster is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th September 2022, 08:47 AM   #33
bruto
Penultimate Amazing
 
bruto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Way way north of Diddy Wah Diddy
Posts: 32,992
Originally Posted by Brainster View Post
Critical thinking was the wrong term; I meant critical theory:
Semantic issues aside, I think your three points well worth pondering, and if I didn't think it would end up in another circular slugfest I might even recommend making #2 a thread subject.
__________________
I love this world, but not for its answers. (Mary Oliver)

"There is another world, but it's in this one." (Paul Eluard)
bruto is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th September 2022, 08:35 PM   #34
gnome
Penultimate Amazing
 
gnome's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 13,314
Originally Posted by ponderingturtle View Post
But money is speech and you can not limit it in that fashion. It is intrinsic to how you framed your support. About the only thing that would fly in your view of the first amendment is if the money is anonymous.

Hell why shouldn't foreign governments run political adds, that is free speech and they are an organization entitled to their own opinions after all.
I think there's a thread topic in this.
__________________

gnome is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th September 2022, 05:31 PM   #35
Nosi
Master Poster
 
Nosi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,913
Cool

Originally Posted by Ladewig View Post
Wouldn’t Liz Cheney be the most recent example of not following the party line?
Liz and Dick Cheney are old school Republicans. They follow the corporate, business always Republican path, and have no use for the anti-science, Capital Building attacking fools. Neither have swerved out of their conservative lane, it is just the rest of the Republican Party is now to the right of Hitler and making the both of 'em look outright progressive.
__________________
__________

Hiding from the
Nosi is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th September 2022, 06:36 PM   #36
MarkCorrigan
¡No pasarán!
 
MarkCorrigan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Слава Україні
Posts: 11,158
I'm pro nuclear.
__________________
Naturalism adjusts it's principles to fit with the observed data.
It's a god of the facts world view. -joobz

When I give food to the poor, they call me a Saint. When I ask why the poor have no food, they call me a Communist. - Hélder Câmara
MarkCorrigan is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:56 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.