Political Roundtable Part XXVI

[dckingsfan]

Where we disagree is that folks of either party (or independents for that matter) are okay with a corrupt government. They aren't.

But what they will do is promote one candidate or party over another to promote their own interests. And that often has the affect of corrupting the process.

They don't want corruption but will ignore it and instead promote corruption, intentionally or otherwise. That's not someone who feels particularly strongly about not wanting corruption unless you choose to define it extremely liberally. If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck...

Yep, you see this with Trump.. You see this with Ds in Chicago.

The folks that voted for Trump are willing to put up with his corruption and they KNOW he is corrupt. Same in Chicago/Illinois where they continually vote for the Ds when they KNOW their (local) party is corrupt.

There is something in it for them or they perceive there is something in it for them.

[Zonkerbl]

Just being honest.
1. Trump's idiotic trade war has a small chance of causing an honest to god recession that would hit right in time for the 2020 election
2. Recessions hurt the incumbent in presidential elections, and I hate Trump's guts because I love America
3. I can afford to root for this recession to happen because my job and the DC region is recession proof.

Trump supporters who want to point at me and say I'm part of the problem because I invested 7 years of my life into getting a Ph.D., because I prepared for my future like a damn adult, can sit on a thumb and spin. Honestly I'm done with all this "oh my goodness aren't you afraid you'll offend the Trump supporters?!?!?!" crap.

I'm the one with the economist degree who spent six years at the Commerce Department trying to defend their interests, opposing job destroying regulations at EPA and OSHA and DHS under W and working to promote US exports. Before that I spent five years trying to help US farmers get more grain and poultry exports into Russia. If those ungrateful bastards want to crap all over me, I have better uses of my time. Sick of this garbage.

[Zonkerbl]

I got an award in 2008 for my work on a DHS rule that helped save US businesses $2 BILLION. A YEAR. I got a picture with the Undersecretary of ITA and everything.

I'm part of the swamp. SCREW YOU.

[Wizardspride]

Read on Twitter

?s=19

[dobrojim]

You still continue to try and paint people who have abortions as innocent, victims, having no other options, and it's ridiculous. Cleaning up corruptions and the abortion issue are apples and basketballs.

I'll agree that corruption and abortion are akin to apples and oranges.
But no one is really arguing for either one as a preferred policy position.

That said, you still try to claim that a fetus is morally the same as an actual baby.
They're not. It's arguing in bad faith to make the claim that they are the same.
Your willingness to impose this belief on everyone is an attempt to
force everyone to adhere to your personal religious beliefs. The choice position is not an
endorsement of casual abortion for frivolous reasons. To argue that we must prohibit all
abortions for this reason is another bad faith argument as there is no evidence that the
govt, or another person external to the specific case at hand, is a better judge
of whether an abortion is a reasonable decision for that person at that time.
To argue otherwise is an insult to women and deeply patronizing.

The general lack of support from those in the anti-choice movement for
measures that have been shown to reduce the number of abortions
hints at a possible puritanical root of their opposition. Many are uncomfortable
with sex other than purely for procreation. And they are free to live their
own lives accordingly.

If you don't like or approve of abortion, don't have (or cause) one.

[daoneandonly]

You still continue to try and paint people who have abortions as innocent, victims, having no other options, and it's ridiculous. Cleaning up corruptions and the abortion issue are apples and basketballs.

I'll agree that corruption and abortion are akin to apples and oranges.
But no one is really arguing for either one as a preferred policy position.

That said, you still try to claim that a fetus is morally the same as an actual baby.
They're not. It's arguing in bad faith to make the claim that they are the same.
Your willingness to impose this belief on everyone is an attempt to
force everyone to adhere to your personal religious beliefs. The choice position is not an
endorsement of casual abortion for frivolous reasons. To argue that we must prohibit all
abortions for this reason is another bad faith argument as there is no evidence that the
govt, or another person external to the specific case at hand, is a better judge
of whether an abortion is a reasonable decision for that person at that time.
To argue otherwise is an insult to women and deeply patronizing.

The general lack of support from those in the anti-choice movement for
measures that have been shown to reduce the number of abortions
hints at a possible puritanical root of their opposition. Many are uncomfortable
with sex other than purely for procreation. And they are free to live their
own lives accordingly.

If you don't like or approve of abortion, don't have (or cause) one.

But it goes beyond religious beliefs, its basic humanity. if it was religious I'd talk about same sex marriage as well, but I never do

If we're diving into this whole religious and enforcing one's belief, where's the line? I could argue paying for welfare and other social uplifting programs is an enforcement of the help others religious belief, why is that different? Or the healthcare and atrocities of separating kids form their families at the border, why is one separate religious beliefs and feelings and the other not? because of something science/biology says? Well science and biology also says the brain does not fully develop until age 30, so then shall we change the legal voting age to 30? Drinking age? Etc? After all, those are things that should be afforded to adults, not people who still dont have fully developed brains.

[Pointgod]

Read on Twitter

?s=19

SMH at the idiots that were camping for Assange.

[Zonkerbl]

The issue at the core of abortion is the conflict between the fetus' and the woman's rights. At what point is it ok to take away a woman's rights over her own body in favor of the fetus? It's basic humanity that all persons must be treated equally respectfully under the law. Women are *uncontroversially* persons. Fetuses are *possibly* persons.

Under the core ethical rules of basic humanity, you can't arbitrarily take away a person's rights. A pregnant woman is *inarguably* a person. The default, therefore, is that a woman has a right to make decisions about what to do with her body. To overcome that, there has to be a compelling, evidence based case that you can make that the fetus is a person, and therefore has rights that may conflict with the woman's. Having a heartbeat doesn't make you a person. My cat has a heartbeat. She's not a *person* with rights. When a fetus is developed enough to survive childbirth, it's considered to have rights at that point that may, potentially, trump the woman's right to autonomy over her decisions.

Any other arbitrary, non-evidence-based method for setting the bar at which women's rights can be ignored in favor of the fetus is necessarily treating women as second class citizens. The law can't treat women that way. It *shouldn't* treat women that way. Not in a system of basic humanity.

You may not like the decisions some women make, perhaps because of a non-evidence based belief that fetuses that can't survive childbirth nevertheless are persons. It's not necessarily a *wrong* belief but it's not one supported by verifiable *facts,* and decisions in court are supposed to be fair, which means they're *supposed* to be fact based, notwithstanding the incredibly racist bias built into our criminal justice system. Being unhappy with a woman's decisions does not mean you should use the force of government to take away her freedom.

I have an (arguably) non-evidence based hatred of Nazis. I am often unhappy with the choice of US Nazis to stage demonstrations in public areas. But I don't have the right to use the force of government to forbid them from exercising a constitutionally guaranteed freedom to assemble. Maybe if I could prove mathematically that there's a certain pattern to Nazi speech that leads directly to terrorist acts, that would allow me to jail Nazis that would not also result in the arrest of, say, Black Lives Matter activists, who are equally reviled by people on the other side of the political spectrum than me. Until I come up with that mathematical proof, I have to put up with letting Nazis do their despicable thing.

[queridiculo]

You're never going to convince these idiots with their narrow minded beliefs about baby killing, you just have to write them off as misguided morons.

Bottom line.

[dobrojim]

You still continue to try and paint people who have abortions as innocent, victims, having no other options, and it's ridiculous. Cleaning up corruptions and the abortion issue are apples and basketballs.

I'll agree that corruption and abortion are akin to apples and oranges.
But no one is really arguing for either one as a preferred policy position.

That said, you still try to claim that a fetus is morally the same as an actual baby.
They're not. It's arguing in bad faith to make the claim that they are the same.[snip]

But it goes beyond religious beliefs, its basic humanity. if it was religious I'd talk about same sex marriage as well, but I never do

If we're diving into this whole religious and enforcing one's belief, where's the line? I could argue paying for welfare and other social uplifting programs is an enforcement of the help others religious belief, why is that different? Or the healthcare and atrocities of separating kids form their families at the border, why is one separate religious beliefs and feelings and the other not? because of something science/biology says? Well science and biology also says the brain does not fully develop until age 30, so then shall we change the legal voting age to 30? Drinking age? Etc? After all, those are things that should be afforded to adults, not people who still dont have fully developed brains.

You somehow missed or chose to ignore the most salient point -
it's a bad faith argument that a fetus should have the same rights as an actual baby.
They are clearly very different. [edit to add- nice job above Zonk]

The second most salient point is the question of who is best suited to make
a difficult decision, the person most directly involved or the govt ie some outside authority.
You did not address that question either.

[dobrojim]

really proud of my son...very brave for writing this piece and proud as well of
his writing ability. He's only 21 and just graduated college a couple weeks ago.

https://www.slamonline.com/the-magazine/start-the-conversation-issues-facing-transgender-athletes-in-the-ncaa/?fbclid=IwAR0h_OJQyNechwf1RVTCRISLQ9W-Tk-YxPtxutwR6OzvFujdfMtcU0dy2Y8

[Zonkerbl]

You're never going to convince these idiots with their narrow minded beliefs about baby killing, you just have to write them off as misguided morons.

Bottom line.

I miss arguing about abortion. It's a genuine, legitimate issue that people who believe in democracy and the rule of law can disagree in good faith about. What disturbs me is when people use the abortion issue as an excuse to, say, abandon the rule of law and the laws of common decency and fairness and stuff the supreme court with judicial activists. To bend election rules and conspire with foreign governments to allow a political minority to gain power and force a theocratic dictatorship on the rest of the country. That's vile and despicable. I hate enemies of this country and the freedoms that it stands for.

[Wizardspride]

Read on Twitter

?s=19

Read on Twitter

?s=19

[dobrojim]

^ Biden may not be my first choice but worse things could happen than what these polls
are predicting.

BTW the first tweet about Trump is so Trump.
Lie, then tell someone to lie for you in attempt to give credence to your lie,
then lie about having done that.

[Zonkerbl]

Biden is our default nominee unless Warren can prove she can do better, which I think she can. We'll see. Also need to win back the Senate. Man I want to see the expression on McConnell's face when he loses his next election. Unlikely though. Frickin Kentucky. What a vile and despicable person, a true enemy of the people.

[Zonkerbl]

Update on my website: I couldn't figure out how to create a test account to see if everything worked the way I wanted. Finally got instructions to do it but I'm overseas, will test it in a few weeks after I get back and if everything is working properly I'll go live.

[montestewart]

Update on my website: I couldn't figure out how to create a test account to see if everything worked the way I wanted. Finally got instructions to do it but I'm overseas, will test it in a few weeks after I get back and if everything is working properly I'll go live.

Z Nation is taken. What are you calling it?

[Zonkerbl]

Update on my website: I couldn't figure out how to create a test account to see if everything worked the way I wanted. Finally got instructions to do it but I'm overseas, will test it in a few weeks after I get back and if everything is working properly I'll go live.

Z Nation is taken. What are you calling it?

I named it after my cat. You'll see. It's mainly a cat picture discussion site with a few extras.

[long suffrin' boulez fan]

really proud of my son...very brave for writing this piece and proud as well of
his writing ability. He's only 21 and just graduated college a couple weeks ago.

https://www.slamonline.com/the-magazine/start-the-conversation-issues-facing-transgender-athletes-in-the-ncaa/?fbclid=IwAR0h_OJQyNechwf1RVTCRISLQ9W-Tk-YxPtxutwR6OzvFujdfMtcU0dy2Y8

Wow. This is by far the most insightful piece on the issue that I’ve read or heard. It’s still confusing, because it is a complex issue, with no simple solution. It’s ethics more than law. But, after reading this, I’m in a much better place to contemplate its nuances. Please thank Sam for me.

[dobrojim]

^ Thank you for those kind words. Max is a very thoughtful person.
And after 4 years at Hollins, he is now a skilled writer (his dad talking).

thanks for taking the time to read it.