Political Roundtable Part XXV

[dckingsfan]

i was just trying to bridge the cognitive gap for DaOne. i agree that the real issue is far beyond the fundamental issue of whether drug laws are good or bad. they're bad, and the topic of debate should be how we fix them.

it seems to be headbashing on my part in trying to convince him, based on the "arguments" presented in his devil's advocacy.

Actually, you point out one of the problems with our current government. Even when the evidence is overwhelming - they have a difficult time rolling back programs due to entrenched recipients. In this case the prison industrial complex, union guards and politicians that get elected on falsities (crime is getting worse we need to do something about it; our war on drugs is working; etc..).

Having a discussion about why to incarcerate those involved in drugs is now a ridiculous notion. If folks would choose not to be ignorant on the subject - the problem would get fixed.

[daoneandonly]

i was just trying to bridge the cognitive gap for DaOne. i agree that the real issue is far beyond the fundamental issue of whether drug laws are good or bad. they're bad, and the topic of debate should be how we fix them.

it seems to be headbashing on my part in trying to convince him, based on the "arguments" presented in his devil's advocacy.

Actually, you point out one of the problems with our current government. Even when the evidence is overwhelming - they have a difficult time rolling back programs due to entrenched recipients. In this case the prison industrial complex, union guards and politicians that get elected on falsities (crime is getting worse we need to do something about it; our war on drugs is working; etc..).

Having a discussion about why to incarcerate those involved in drugs is now a ridiculous notion. If folks would choose not to be ignorant on the subject - the problem would get fixed.

Ignorant how? Using drugs is a choice, do these folks in question have no other choice? Were drugs forced down their throats? Having compassion is one thing, dont get me wrong, the world needs more of it. But having more compassion for drug users than other groups of people, I just don't understand it

[dckingsfan]

i was just trying to bridge the cognitive gap for DaOne. i agree that the real issue is far beyond the fundamental issue of whether drug laws are good or bad. they're bad, and the topic of debate should be how we fix them.

it seems to be headbashing on my part in trying to convince him, based on the "arguments" presented in his devil's advocacy.

Actually, you point out one of the problems with our current government. Even when the evidence is overwhelming - they have a difficult time rolling back programs due to entrenched recipients. In this case the prison industrial complex, union guards and politicians that get elected on falsities (crime is getting worse we need to do something about it; our war on drugs is working; etc..).

Having a discussion about why to incarcerate those involved in drugs is now a ridiculous notion. If folks would choose not to be ignorant on the subject - the problem would get fixed.

Ignorant how? Using drugs is a choice, do these folks in question have no other choice? Were drugs forced down their throats? Having compassion is one thing, dont get me wrong, the world needs more of it. But having more compassion for drug users than other groups of people, I just don't understand it

Not ignorant on that - ignorant on the cost to GDP and the costs to society.

I don't care (within the context of the argument) about the compassion side - it is a policy where the unintended consequences far outweigh any social good of incarcerating those individuals.

And it isn't even close.

[daoneandonly]

Actually, you point out one of the problems with our current government. Even when the evidence is overwhelming - they have a difficult time rolling back programs due to entrenched recipients. In this case the prison industrial complex, union guards and politicians that get elected on falsities (crime is getting worse we need to do something about it; our war on drugs is working; etc..).

Having a discussion about why to incarcerate those involved in drugs is now a ridiculous notion. If folks would choose not to be ignorant on the subject - the problem would get fixed.

Ignorant how? Using drugs is a choice, do these folks in question have no other choice? Were drugs forced down their throats? Having compassion is one thing, dont get me wrong, the world needs more of it. But having more compassion for drug users than other groups of people, I just don't understand it

Not ignorant on that - ignorant on the cost to GDP and the costs to society.

I don't care (within the context of the argument) about the compassion side - it is a policy where the unintended consequences far outweigh any social good of incarcerating those individuals.

And it isn't even close.

Is that an opinion though and not anything factual? If we're taking how money is spent, I'd rather my tax dollars go to put drug offenders behind bars vs money going to planned parenthood (don't use and dont agree with whatsoever), national parks (don't use/go, public broadcasting, and you can easily convince me on NASA too.

[dckingsfan]

Ignorant how? Using drugs is a choice, do these folks in question have no other choice? Were drugs forced down their throats? Having compassion is one thing, dont get me wrong, the world needs more of it. But having more compassion for drug users than other groups of people, I just don't understand it

Not ignorant on that - ignorant on the cost to GDP and the costs to society.

I don't care (within the context of the argument) about the compassion side - it is a policy where the unintended consequences far outweigh any social good of incarcerating those individuals.

And it isn't even close.

Is that an opinion though and not anything factual? If we're taking how money is spent, I'd rather my tax dollars go to put drug offenders behind bars vs money going to planned parenthood (don't use and dont agree with whatsoever), national parks (don't use/go, public broadcasting, and you can easily convince me on NASA too.

Multiply all the money going toward those causes by an order of 100 and then you get the idea.

Unbelievably stupid.

[Wizardspride]

Read on Twitter

?s=19

[dobrojim]

(first I want to state my complete frustration with the functionality of this site.
I have found that I must compose in a separate application in order to complete
the composition of a post before it completely disappears without a trace)

^ it will be interesting to watch and listen to the explanations
and rationalizations of essentially the entire cadre of elected
GOP officials (when this house of cards finally crumbles)
for their obsequiousness and complete lack of
curiosity about matters pertaining to Trump and Russia. I
predict that they will offer platitudes along the lines of
"how could we have known it was this bad?".

The irony is that while Russia was a socialist autocracy
they represented the epitome of hawkishness in their
opposition and skepticism of any and all things Russian
and now that Russia has established itself as the world's
preeminent authoritarian kleptocracy, they cannot bring
themselves to say a single unkind word. What does this
say about their guiding principles?

[I_Like_Dirt]

Multiply all the money going toward those causes by an order of 100 and then you get the idea.

Unbelievably stupid.

Yeah, quite frankly, while they would be well down my list of preferred choices, I'd rather see that money go towards the military or to actually fund a tax cut (as opposed to giving a totally unfunded one) than burned on the industrial prison system. Just a totally horribly inefficient and ineffective system. In fact, thinking in it a bit, I'd love to see a load of it assigned to the military with the express intention to be to fund rehabilitation into civilian life, PTSD supports and such. If done properly, you could probably further reduce crime rather dramatically by helping those in vulnerable situations and prone to violence who might be more inclined and able to turn towards crime given the wrong set of circumstances. You, know... actually support the troops.

[Pointgod]

Arrest me you Alabama cowards

Watch on YouTube

The joke is CNN's tagline, War on Women, more like War on Murderers

Ridiculous of irrelevant people like Busy Philips, Amber Tamblyn, and a bunch of no name women brag about their abortions with the hastag #youknowme. Well what if their parents decided to abort them? Then we wouldn't know them, but they don't post about that obvious fact.

Does your whole argument regarding abortion change when you realize that religious women, Conservative women and Republican women that all rail against abortions often have it themselves? Or when Republican politicians tell their mistresses to get abortions?

[daoneandonly]

Arrest me you Alabama cowards

Watch on YouTube

The joke is CNN's tagline, War on Women, more like War on Murderers

Ridiculous of irrelevant people like Busy Philips, Amber Tamblyn, and a bunch of no name women brag about their abortions with the hastag #youknowme. Well what if their parents decided to abort them? Then we wouldn't know them, but they don't post about that obvious fact.

Does your whole argument regarding abortion change when you realize that religious women, Conservative women and Republican women that all rail against abortions often have it themselves? Or when Republican politicians tell their mistresses to get abortions?

No, because if those people do exist (I'm sure they do, just not as big as you may be alluding to), my stance on life can't eb swayed by hypocrites such as those. They are the worse of the worse.

[popper]

(first I want to state my complete frustration with the functionality of this site.
I have found that I must compose in a separate application in order to complete
the composition of a post before it completely disappears without a trace)

^ it will be interesting to watch and listen to the explanations
and rationalizations of essentially the entire cadre of elected
GOP officials (when this house of cards finally crumbles)
for their obsequiousness and complete lack of
curiosity about matters pertaining to Trump and Russia. I
predict that they will offer platitudes along the lines of
"how could we have known it was this bad?".

The irony is that while Russia was a socialist autocracy
they represented the epitome of hawkishness in their
opposition and skepticism of any and all things Russian
and now that Russia has established itself as the world's
preeminent authoritarian kleptocracy, they cannot bring
themselves to say a single unkind word. What does this
say about their guiding principles?

Regarding your second paragraph, I believe you are entirely misinformed. The majority of R’s throughout the two year investigation were supportive and warned Trump not to take any steps to end or interfere with it. Do you have information that contradicts this view?

PS. I also don’t understand your last paragraph given Trump has imposed the most stringent sanctions on Russia in our history.

[Wizardspride]

(first I want to state my complete frustration with the functionality of this site.
I have found that I must compose in a separate application in order to complete
the composition of a post before it completely disappears without a trace)

^ it will be interesting to watch and listen to the explanations
and rationalizations of essentially the entire cadre of elected
GOP officials (when this house of cards finally crumbles)
for their obsequiousness and complete lack of
curiosity about matters pertaining to Trump and Russia. I
predict that they will offer platitudes along the lines of
"how could we have known it was this bad?".

The irony is that while Russia was a socialist autocracy
they represented the epitome of hawkishness in their
opposition and skepticism of any and all things Russian
and now that Russia has established itself as the world's
preeminent authoritarian kleptocracy, they cannot bring
themselves to say a single unkind word. What does this
say about their guiding principles?

Regarding your second paragraph, I believe you are entirely misinformed. The majority of R’s throughout the two year investigation were supportive and warned Trump not to take any steps to end or interfere with it. Do you have information that contradicts this view?

PS. I also don’t understand your last paragraph given Trump has imposed the most stringent sanctions on Russia in our history.

Don't know how closely you've been following this but from all reports Trump resisted imposing sanctions until he couldn't anymore.

So yes, he imposed them but he threw a hissy fit about doing so.

And even now, he talks about lifting them.

As I've been saying to basically every conservative I encounter online: "Read the entire report and then tell me what you think".

[popper]

(first I want to state my complete frustration with the functionality of this site.
I have found that I must compose in a separate application in order to complete
the composition of a post before it completely disappears without a trace)

^ it will be interesting to watch and listen to the explanations
and rationalizations of essentially the entire cadre of elected
GOP officials (when this house of cards finally crumbles)
for their obsequiousness and complete lack of
curiosity about matters pertaining to Trump and Russia. I
predict that they will offer platitudes along the lines of
"how could we have known it was this bad?".

The irony is that while Russia was a socialist autocracy
they represented the epitome of hawkishness in their
opposition and skepticism of any and all things Russian
and now that Russia has established itself as the world's
preeminent authoritarian kleptocracy, they cannot bring
themselves to say a single unkind word. What does this
say about their guiding principles?

Regarding your second paragraph, I believe you are entirely misinformed. The majority of R’s throughout the two year investigation were supportive and warned Trump not to take any steps to end or interfere with it. Do you have information that contradicts this view?

PS. I also don’t understand your last paragraph given Trump has imposed the most stringent sanctions on Russia in our history.

Don't know how closely you've been following this but from all reports Trump resisted imposing sanctions until he couldn't anymore.

So yes, he imposed them but he threw a hissy fit about doing so.

And even now, he talks about lifting them.

As I've been saying to basically every conservative I encounter online: "Read the entire report and then tell me what you think".

I have not read it WP. I trust Mueller and the 15 experienced prosecutors who despise Trump to render their legal conclusions. They found no collusion. Mueller concluded his investigation without interference from Trump so no one obstructed the legal process. What more is there to debate?

[Pointgod]

The joke is CNN's tagline, War on Women, more like War on Murderers

Ridiculous of irrelevant people like Busy Philips, Amber Tamblyn, and a bunch of no name women brag about their abortions with the hastag #youknowme. Well what if their parents decided to abort them? Then we wouldn't know them, but they don't post about that obvious fact.

Does your whole argument regarding abortion change when you realize that religious women, Conservative women and Republican women that all rail against abortions often have it themselves? Or when Republican politicians tell their mistresses to get abortions?

No, because if those people do exist (I'm sure they do, just not as big as you may be alluding to), my stance on life can't eb swayed by hypocrites such as those. They are the worse of the worse.

Well considering that 1 in 4 women have had an abortion then there are literally millions of Republicans, Conservatives, Christians and anti abortion women that have indeed had abortions themselves. That means that statistically you know female family members, friends, coworkers, classmates or acquaintances that I’m sure you would consider are good people that have had abortions. Things aren’t as black and white as you paint them. I suggest talking to women who’ve had abortions and trying to empathize with them. It might open you up to different perspectives on the issue.

[Pointgod]

Regarding your second paragraph, I believe you are entirely misinformed. The majority of R’s throughout the two year investigation were supportive and warned Trump not to take any steps to end or interfere with it. Do you have information that contradicts this view?

PS. I also don’t understand your last paragraph given Trump has imposed the most stringent sanctions on Russia in our history.

Don't know how closely you've been following this but from all reports Trump resisted imposing sanctions until he couldn't anymore.

So yes, he imposed them but he threw a hissy fit about doing so.

And even now, he talks about lifting them.

As I've been saying to basically every conservative I encounter online: "Read the entire report and then tell me what you think".

I have not read it WP. I trust Mueller and the 15 experienced prosecutors who despise Trump to render their legal conclusions. They found no collusion. Mueller concluded his investigation without interference from Trump so no one obstructed the legal process. What more is there to debate?

That’s literally the opposite of what the investigation found but okay....

[verbal8]

I guess the Barr whitewash was enough for him.

Don't know how closely you've been following this but from all reports Trump resisted imposing sanctions until he couldn't anymore.

So yes, he imposed them but he threw a hissy fit about doing so.

And even now, he talks about lifting them.

As I've been saying to basically every conservative I encounter online: "Read the entire report and then tell me what you think".

I have not read it WP. I trust Mueller and the 15 experienced prosecutors who despise Trump to render their legal conclusions. They found no collusion. Mueller concluded his investigation without interference from Trump so no one obstructed the legal process. What more is there to debate?

That’s literally the opposite of what the investigation found but okay....

[popper]

Don't know how closely you've been following this but from all reports Trump resisted imposing sanctions until he couldn't anymore.

So yes, he imposed them but he threw a hissy fit about doing so.

And even now, he talks about lifting them.

As I've been saying to basically every conservative I encounter online: "Read the entire report and then tell me what you think".

I have not read it WP. I trust Mueller and the 15 experienced prosecutors who despise Trump to render their legal conclusions. They found no collusion. Mueller concluded his investigation without interference from Trump so no one obstructed the legal process. What more is there to debate?

That’s literally the opposite of what the investigation found but okay....

I posted they found no collusion. I posted Mueller and his team were allowed to complete their two year investigation without interference. I posted that Trump did not obstruct Mueller’s investigation. These are facts. On what basis do you dispute them?

[Pointgod]

I have not read it WP. I trust Mueller and the 15 experienced prosecutors who despise Trump to render their legal conclusions. They found no collusion. Mueller concluded his investigation without interference from Trump so no one obstructed the legal process. What more is there to debate?

That’s literally the opposite of what the investigation found but okay....

I posted they found no collusion. I posted Mueller and his team were allowed to complete their two year investigation without interference. I posted that Trump did not obstruct Mueller’s investigation. These are facts. On what basis do you dispute them?

A couple points of clarification because Trump, Barr and the rest of the clowns have done their best to muddy the waters.

1. Mueller laid out at the beginning of his report that he wasn’t investigating collusion. Legally speaking collusion is not a thing, however conspiracy is. Mueller investigated conspiracy and what he found was the Trump campaign openly sought help from Russia, they had numerous meetings with Russians and were planning to press releases around Russia leaking stolen information about Clinton and DNC. At no time did a single person go to the FBI and in fact pretty much everything they did walked up to be line of conspiracy, but based on evidence it wasn’t enough to bring charges. This is why Trump and his band of idiots lied about it. There’s no way they didn’t realize what they did wasn’t illegal, but they did know that it was politically damaging. How would you react if a Democratic candidate was working with China to get dirt on Trump or asked China to hack Trumps tax returns?

2. Mueller laid out 10 instances of obstruction of justice this was pretty clear so I don’t know what you’re talking about. He clearly states if the President did not obstruct justice he would say so. It’s implied that because of department of justice rules he can’t indict a sitting President but he clearly spelled it out in the report that congress can.

It’s not even a question that Trump obstructed justice, witness tampered and intimidated witnesses. If you haven’t read the Mueller report then take the words of over a 700 non partisan Federal prosecutors that read the Mueller report and say Trump obstructed justice.

https://thehill.com/policy/national-security/442537-list-of-former-federal-prosecutors-accusing-trump-of-obstruction

Or take the words of the Republican congressman that read the full report and says Trump has committed impeachable offences:

Read on Twitter

Or Mueller who said Barr mischaracterized report (read lied and perjured himself)

https://thehill.com/policy/national-security/441489-mueller-told-barr-his-summary-didnt-capture-context-nature-and

If you’re not going to read the report yourself then you should at the very least read summaries from non right wing news sites. They have completely jumped the shark and only serve to protect Trump politically. They have a vested interest in making sure that his supporters continue to blindly follow him and will continue to make sure their readers are completely misinformed about the Mueller report. It’s either a grand conspiracy that all these serious lawyers and lawmakers from all political parties conclude that Trump obstructed justice or you can admit that the President is a criminal and you simply don’t care.

[daoneandonly]

Does your whole argument regarding abortion change when you realize that religious women, Conservative women and Republican women that all rail against abortions often have it themselves? Or when Republican politicians tell their mistresses to get abortions?

No, because if those people do exist (I'm sure they do, just not as big as you may be alluding to), my stance on life can't eb swayed by hypocrites such as those. They are the worse of the worse.

Well considering that 1 in 4 women have had an abortion then there are literally millions of Republicans, Conservatives, Christians and anti abortion women that have indeed had abortions themselves. That means that statistically you know female family members, friends, coworkers, classmates or acquaintances that I’m sure you would consider are good people that have had abortions. Things aren’t as black and white as you paint them. I suggest talking to women who’ve had abortions and trying to empathize with them. It might open you up to different perspectives on the issue.

Oh I don't doubt there's hypocrisy on the basis in which you mentioned, and it's truly sad and pathetic on their parts. I again won't use the phrase "black & white" as many folks tend to make political issues such as these into racial disparities as well, not saying you are doing it, but I'll prefer to sue the term "cut and dry" which I think it is in the majority of cases. Abortion is a selfish, heartless decision, plain and simple. Again, I'm not talking in the case of the mother or child's life is in danger if carried to term, and rape is also one that merits discussion, those are circumstances beyond the woman's control, essentially through no fault of her own.

But if it's just an accidental pregnancy, she can just terminate her child like it's apiece of garbage, a banana peel to just throw away, I don't think there's anything a woman in that category could say to justify the choice

[popper]

That’s literally the opposite of what the investigation found but okay....

I posted they found no collusion. I posted Mueller and his team were allowed to complete their two year investigation without interference. I posted that Trump did not obstruct Mueller’s investigation. These are facts. On what basis do you dispute them?

A couple points of clarification because Trump, Barr and the rest of the clowns have done their best to muddy the waters.

1. Mueller laid out at the beginning of his report that he wasn’t investigating collusion. Legally speaking collusion is not a thing, however conspiracy is. Mueller investigated conspiracy and what he found was the Trump campaign openly sought help from Russia, they had numerous meetings with Russians and were planning to press releases around Russia leaking stolen information about Clinton and DNC. At no time did a single person go to the FBI and in fact pretty much everything they did walked up to be line of conspiracy, but based on evidence it wasn’t enough to bring charges. This is why Trump and his band of idiots lied about it. There’s no way they didn’t realize what they did wasn’t illegal, but they did know that it was politically damaging. How would you react if a Democratic candidate was working with China to get dirt on Trump or asked China to hack Trumps tax returns?

2. Mueller laid out 10 instances of obstruction of justice this was pretty clear so I don’t know what you’re talking about. He clearly states if the President did not obstruct justice he would say so. It’s implied that because of department of justice rules he can’t indict a sitting President but he clearly spelled it out in the report that congress can.

It’s not even a question that Trump obstructed justice, witness tampered and intimidated witnesses. If you haven’t read the Mueller report then take the words of over a 700 non partisan Federal prosecutors that read the Mueller report and say Trump obstructed justice.

https://thehill.com/policy/national-security/442537-list-of-former-federal-prosecutors-accusing-trump-of-obstruction

Or take the words of the Republican congressman that read the full report and says Trump has committed impeachable offences:

Read on Twitter

Or Mueller who said Barr mischaracterized report (read lied and perjured himself)

https://thehill.com/policy/national-security/441489-mueller-told-barr-his-summary-didnt-capture-context-nature-and

If you’re not going to read the report yourself then you should at the very least read summaries from non right wing news sites. They have completely jumped the shark and only serve to protect Trump politically. They have a vested interest in making sure that his supporters continue to blindly follow him and will continue to make sure their readers are completely misinformed about the Mueller report. It’s either a grand conspiracy that all these serious lawyers and lawmakers from all political parties conclude that Trump obstructed justice or you can admit that the President is a criminal and you simply don’t care.

Ok. Since I haven’t read the report I’ll defer to you and WP. If you guys believe there’s a strong case for obstruction then the House should probably impeach. Let’s get on with it and quit dilly-dallying.