Political Roundtable Part XXVII

[Pointgod]

so glad that my emotional ties to this board and its members can be used as a weapon against me and thrown back in my face.

so sorry that a board that I've been a member of for over half my life is difficult for me to walk away from.

especially sorry that sh*t posting by sh*t posters that have already deadened the participation of this board, and straight up drove away posters i grew up admiring like fish and sev, and continue to alienate and chill board participation.

never mind that i have posted thousands upon thousands of words already trying to engage substantively only to be countered time and time again with accusations that i'm a baby-killing, child raping hypocrite.

never mind that posters with legitimate insights, backed by decades of training and experience like zonk have to handicap their posting style to address literal idiots.

sorry that actual debate of real issues always has to circle back to dumbsplaining topics like abortion to people that refuse to take their fingers out of their wax encrusted ears.

i may very well keep on making hollow threats of ditching this board, and that may very well make me a coward and a hypocrite but that still doesn't change the fact that this board is worse off in allowing Da1 to continue posting. Again, please just look at the past few pages of discussion. Nothing but walls of text about trans bans and abortion. No discussion about Syria, Baghdadi, Katie Hill. Go back further. Very little discussion about China and the NBA - in a politics thread on a basketball forum. Everything circles back to babykilling. I don't want to talk about abortion. There's nothing to talk about. It's settled law. But we can't get around it. We're being dragged backwards. We're allowing a single poster to weigh down discourse because he refuses to live in reality.

Don’t let the idiot get to you. The board needs thoughtful posters like you. I honestly don’t bother with his incoherent ramblings about abortion. The thing with da1 is that if you engage with him he’ll lead you on the same tangent using circular logic so just tell him to f$*k off. I agree with you though, this board needs to have better policies. STD did an insane amount of shitposting that would make a 4chan troll jealous and it took numerous attempts before he was banned. Da1 is not on the same level but there should be a point where purposeful derailment isn’t something that should be tolerated.

[Pointgod]

I havent read the entire thread, but how would banning abortion would increase abortion? That sounds weird to me.

Ask yourself this. Did prohibition decrease alcohol consumption? Does making drugs illegal keep people from doing them? Banning doesn’t actually address the root cause of problems and often had the opposite effect because you’re dealing with human beings.

[daoneandonly]

so glad that my emotional ties to this board and its members can be used as a weapon against me and thrown back in my face.

so sorry that a board that I've been a member of for over half my life is difficult for me to walk away from.

especially sorry that sh*t posting by sh*t posters that have already deadened the participation of this board, and straight up drove away posters i grew up admiring like fish and sev, and continue to alienate and chill board participation.

never mind that i have posted thousands upon thousands of words already trying to engage substantively only to be countered time and time again with accusations that i'm a baby-killing, child raping hypocrite.

never mind that posters with legitimate insights, backed by decades of training and experience like zonk have to handicap their posting style to address literal idiots.

sorry that actual debate of real issues always has to circle back to dumbsplaining topics like abortion to people that refuse to take their fingers out of their wax encrusted ears.

i may very well keep on making hollow threats of ditching this board, and that may very well make me a coward and a hypocrite but that still doesn't change the fact that this board is worse off in allowing Da1 to continue posting. Again, please just look at the past few pages of discussion. Nothing but walls of text about trans bans and abortion. No discussion about Syria, Baghdadi, Katie Hill. Go back further. Very little discussion about China and the NBA - in a politics thread on a basketball forum. Everything circles back to babykilling. I don't want to talk about abortion. There's nothing to talk about. It's settled law. But we can't get around it. We're being dragged backwards. We're allowing a single poster to weigh down discourse because he refuses to live in reality.

Don’t let the idiot get to you. The board needs thoughtful posters like you. I honestly don’t bother with his incoherent ramblings about abortion. The thing with da1 is that if you engage with him he’ll lead you on the same tangent using circular logic so just tell him to f$*k off. I agree with you though, this board needs to have better policies. STD did an insane amount of shitposting that would make a 4chan troll jealous and it took numerous attempts before he was banned. Da1 is not on the same level but there should be a point where purposeful derailment isn’t something that should be tolerated.

I know you hate me Point, the feeling is not mutual in this case. I genuinely think you're a good person despite how much we disagree. This whole chain got derailed when we were talking about the heavy violence in highly liberal concentrated areas, and for some reason someone needed to chime in with sex with animals in conservative areas, thats derailing.

But like I said, I posted about Katie Hill, no one wants to talk about her corruption. An opportunity to talk about some of the things this admin is doing right with respect to the Baghdadi raid, and again crickets.

[daoneandonly]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/10/27/all-times-trump-has-refused-give-obama-credit-bin-laden-raid/

Treat others as you would have them treat you

Come on, is that how some of the folks you defend on here behave?

And speaking of this, how is it that many, if not most on the left think the death penalty is cruel and should be abolished, yet praise the murder of Bin laden because Obama led the charge? is it only cruel if the criminal in question is on your side of the political spectrum?

[I_Like_Dirt]

I havent read the entire thread, but how would banning abortion would increase abortion? That sounds weird to me.

Banning essentially doesn't outright prevent anything. The idea that banning abortion would prevent them essentially has, at it's heart, the belief that abortions are just easy decisions to bail on other bad choices and avoid consequences when that isn't even remotely close to the case basically ever. If we're talking about something that is a life-altering decision in a terrible situation like abortion, whether or not its legal is essentially a trivial factor in the decision. All banning abortion really achieves is removing it from public view and allowing certain people a sense of moral superiority.

The catch, though, is that banning abortion means that people also bail on dealing with the actual causes of abortion. Why would people pay for things like women's health, contraception, education, economic stability, etc. if abortion is illegal and therefore not a problem? That's really at the core of this, too. People for banning abortion are frequently hiding behind a moral argument but it's not a moral argument because they're not actually advocating for action that would legitimately reduce abortion - many of which are currently happening now to varying degrees which is why abortion rates have historically dropped. Do you want your tax dollars going to help someone else? If not, then ban whatever it is you perceive they're doing which results in that activity and presto! Suddenly you're tax dollars are being paid to try and punish people who break the law banning whatever it is you wanted passed instead of supporting people in difficult times. The end result? You're invariably going to have more abortions because conditions are now worse for the women making tough decisions since you've eliminated a lot of the social programs and constructs that supported women and parents and chosen to ban it instead.

[UcanUwill]

I havent read the entire thread, but how would banning abortion would increase abortion? That sounds weird to me.

Ask yourself this. Did prohibition decrease alcohol consumption? Does making drugs illegal keep people from doing them? Banning doesn’t actually address the root cause of problems and often had the opposite effect because you’re dealing with human beings.

I understand this, I t surely wouldnt stop abortions, but how would it increase it? It just sounds as ridiculous argument.

All in all I understand people who want to ban it. Sure its idealistic, but you can say being illegal doesnt stop people from using meth, so are we also argue that its better just make it legal? Of course its only comparable for people who believe abortion is wrong act, like using dangerous drugs or doing crime. I dont see abortion as murder like christian propoganda wants me to see it, but I understand some people see it that way, so they really want it to ban it and you will not change their mind because its idealistic stance to begin with, they want abortion TO BE A CRIME, there is no other way.

[dckingsfan]

I havent read the entire thread, but how would banning abortion would increase abortion? That sounds weird to me.

Ask yourself this. Did prohibition decrease alcohol consumption? Does making drugs illegal keep people from doing them? Banning doesn’t actually address the root cause of problems and often had the opposite effect because you’re dealing with human beings.

Exactly - we got it right with alcohol - we screwed the pooch with drugs. It just brought more dangerous drugs into the mix with less oversight - how often do people die because of alcohol they purchase - like never - it is regulated.

What we have seen is a methodology around birth control approaches and measurements around what is effective. And it is clearly working (see figure). Making abortion illegal, getting rid of Planned Parenthood, stopping the funding of birth control will send it underground - less will use proper birth control, many will get their own birth control drugs (just like todays underground drug market) or skip across the boarder to have an abortion.

The idea is not to go backward but to double down on what is clearly effective and again halve the number of abortions (again and again). Making abortions illegal, getting rid of Planned Parenthood, stopping the funding of birth control will drive the number back up. That isn't a plan - that is ignorance of the facts. And that would just shoot the rate back up and imprison a bunch of women, further slowing the birthrate in the country and increasing the need for immigration.

[dckingsfan]

I havent read the entire thread, but how would banning abortion would increase abortion? That sounds weird to me.

Banning essentially doesn't outright prevent anything. The idea that banning abortion would prevent them essentially has, at it's heart, the belief that abortions are just easy decisions to bail on other bad choices and avoid consequences when that isn't even remotely close to the case basically ever. If we're talking about something that is a life-altering decision in a terrible situation like abortion, whether or not its legal is essentially a trivial factor in the decision. All banning abortion really achieves is removing it from public view and allowing certain people a sense of moral superiority.

The catch, though, is that banning abortion means that people also bail on dealing with the actual causes of abortion. Why would people pay for things like women's health, contraception, education, economic stability, etc. if abortion is illegal and therefore not a problem? That's really at the core of this, too. People for banning abortion are frequently hiding behind a moral argument but it's not a moral argument because they're not actually advocating for action that would legitimately reduce abortion - many of which are currently happening now to varying degrees which is why abortion rates have historically dropped. Do you want your tax dollars going to help someone else? If not, then ban whatever it is you perceive they're doing which results in that activity and presto! Suddenly you're tax dollars are being paid to try and punish people who break the law banning whatever it is you wanted passed instead of supporting people in difficult times. The end result? You're invariably going to have more abortions because conditions are now worse for the women making tough decisions since you've eliminated a lot of the social programs and constructs that supported women and parents and chosen to ban it instead.

Adding one more thing to this - the prison industrial complex is much more expensive than any help we would give women. Just saying...

[pancakes3]

I havent read the entire thread, but how would banning abortion would increase abortion? That sounds weird to me.

Ask yourself this. Did prohibition decrease alcohol consumption? Does making drugs illegal keep people from doing them? Banning doesn’t actually address the root cause of problems and often had the opposite effect because you’re dealing with human beings.

I understand this, I t surely wouldnt stop abortions, but how would it increase it? It just sounds as ridiculous argument.

All in all I understand people who want to ban it. Sure its idealistic, but you can say being illegal doesnt stop people from using meth, so are we also argue that its better just make it legal? Of course its only comparable for people who believe abortion is wrong act, like using dangerous drugs or doing crime. I dont see abortion as murder like christian propoganda wants me to see it, but I understand some people see it that way, so they really want it to ban it and you will not change their mind because its idealistic stance to begin with, they want abortion TO BE A CRIME, there is no other way.

I'm not sure what the logic is behind a direct "banning abortion" -> "increased abortions" effect would be, but the way an abortion ban would be implemented would almost certainly lead to more abortions bc it would also involve defunding planned parenthood and birth control in general. taking away morning after pills AND banning abortions would probably increase abortions.

https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/05/16/what-actually-happens-when-a-country-bans-abortion-romania-alabama/

scooped by dck

[dckingsfan]

For all of us that care about fiscal sanity - a very good reason to get rid of this not-tax and spend administration.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2019/10/25/us-deficit-hit-billion-marking-nearly-percent-increase-during-trump-era/

The U.S. government’s budget deficit ballooned to nearly $1 trillion in 2019, a $205 billion increase from a year earlier, as America’s fiscal imbalance widened for a fourth consecutive year despite a sustained run of economic growth.
The country’s worsening fiscal picture runs in sharp contrast to President Trump’s campaign promise to eliminate the federal debt within eight years. Since taking office, Trump has endorsed big spending increases and steered most Republicans to abandon the deficit obsession they held during the Obama administration.

[pancakes3]

look at this sh*t

decorated veteran, and top Ukraine expert on the NSC lieutenant colonel Alex Vindman who sat in on Trump's phone call is gearing up to testify, and had reported the call to a NSC attorney as it happens. What does the right do?

Read on Twitter

[dobrojim]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/10/27/all-times-trump-has-refused-give-obama-credit-bin-laden-raid/

The point of posting this link was not to make explicit my support or rejection of
assassination as foreign policy.

A suggestion was made to discuss Trump's handling of the recent raid on
the ISIS leader. There are a number of things one can point to about this
issue that do not cast favorable light on POTUS. The raid was made more
difficult by the decision to abandon the Kurds. In announcing the raid
the President revealed a number of details which the military was not happy
about. And the link basically describes out a number of public statements
made by Trump about Obama's handling of the Osama Bin Laden raid.
If we use Trump's previous statements as the standard for judging
his own current performance, he doesn't get much credit.

In a December 2011 CNN interview about the 2012 presidential candidates, Trump repeatedly rejected Wolf Blitzer’s statement crediting Obama for bin Laden’s death.

“But anybody sitting in that office, Wolf, would have — I keep hearing about, oh, bin Laden, the military did an incredible job and they called and they said, we have him. And he said, go get him,” Trump said, according to a transcript of the conversation. “What’s he going to say, don’t get him? And he gets all this credit? It’s a lot of crap.”

Trump returned to that grievance multiple times. In April 2012, he tweeted an article that conservative commentator Ben Shapiro wrote for Breitbart, which claimed that Adm. William McRaven — not Obama — was “the hero here.” Above a link to the story, Trump wrote that Obama merely “gave vague directions.”

[montestewart]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/10/27/all-times-trump-has-refused-give-obama-credit-bin-laden-raid/

Treat others as you would have them treat you

Come on, is that how some of the folks you defend on here behave?

And speaking of this, how is it that many, if not most on the left think the death penalty is cruel and should be abolished, yet praise the murder of Bin laden because Obama led the charge? is it only cruel if the criminal in question is on your side of the political spectrum?

Obviously, Bin laden is on our side of the political spectrum. We all hate America and its freedoms.

The green font is for you, Da1! Peace!

[dckingsfan]

look at this sh*t

decorated veteran, and top Ukraine expert on the NSC lieutenant colonel Alex Vindman who sat in on Trump's phone call is gearing up to testify, and had reported the call to a NSC attorney as it happens. What does the right do?

Two things here active and retired military. Active military will keep their mouths shut unless they see a clear and present danger to the country.

Retired military can say what they want - even a very conservative military officer and hero from Texas.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/17/opinion/trump-mcraven-syria-military.html

[dobrojim]

look at this sh*t

decorated veteran, and top Ukraine expert on the NSC lieutenant colonel Alex Vindman who sat in on Trump's phone call is gearing up to testify, and had reported the call to a NSC attorney as it happens. What does the right do?

Read on Twitter

Disgraced Bushie lawyer J Yoo suggested Vindman is a spy on Laura Ingram (Fox).
Paraphrasing The Dark Lord (Cheney), Yoo is a major league a$$hole.

[daoneandonly]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/10/27/all-times-trump-has-refused-give-obama-credit-bin-laden-raid/

Treat others as you would have them treat you

Come on, is that how some of the folks you defend on here behave?

And speaking of this, how is it that many, if not most on the left think the death penalty is cruel and should be abolished, yet praise the murder of Bin laden because Obama led the charge? is it only cruel if the criminal in question is on your side of the political spectrum?

Obviously, Bin laden is on our side of the political spectrum. We all hate America and its freedoms.

The green font is for you, Da1! Peace!

SO why are there so many Dems that think this guy named Lee Boyd Malvo didnt deserve to be put to death? He's a mass murderer as well. But somehow, killing him would be cruel

[montestewart]

Ask yourself this. Did prohibition decrease alcohol consumption? Does making drugs illegal keep people from doing them? Banning doesn’t actually address the root cause of problems and often had the opposite effect because you’re dealing with human beings.

I understand this, I t surely wouldnt stop abortions, but how would it increase it? It just sounds as ridiculous argument.

All in all I understand people who want to ban it. Sure its idealistic, but you can say being illegal doesnt stop people from using meth, so are we also argue that its better just make it legal? Of course its only comparable for people who believe abortion is wrong act, like using dangerous drugs or doing crime. I dont see abortion as murder like christian propoganda wants me to see it, but I understand some people see it that way, so they really want it to ban it and you will not change their mind because its idealistic stance to begin with, they want abortion TO BE A CRIME, there is no other way.

I'm not sure what the logic is behind a direct "banning abortion" -> "increased abortions" effect would be, but the way an abortion ban would be implemented would almost certainly lead to more abortions bc it would also involve defunding planned parenthood and birth control in general. taking away morning after pills AND banning abortions would probably increase abortions.

https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/05/16/what-actually-happens-when-a-country-bans-abortion-romania-alabama/

scooped by dck

That's a better explanation. Alcohol consumption did decrease during prohibition (historians pretty much have a climate change-level consensus on that), but at what cost? If you ban and increasingly criminalize abortions, reduce or eliminate sex education, and reduce or eliminate family planning and contraception options, perhaps the combination of all these could (in theory) increase abortions, but more likely it would increased the number of unwanted, unplanned, under planned, under provided-for children, along with a rise of illegal abortions and related deaths.

The United States has been among the vanguard with respect to the rights of women. Under some of these anti-abortion scenarios, I think our sisters, mothers, and daughters would be sent back in the direction of square one, or perhaps even further to Atwood-land.

[montestewart]

Da1, why are you calling the death of Bin laden an Obama execution and comparing him to the incarcerated Lee Boyd Malvo? Is that something they are currently saying in the fringe talking point-o-sphere? You are my barometer there, help a brother out.

[daoneandonly]

I'm saying both deserved death. But one was celebrated because who was in the office of President at the time he was taken out, and the other was protected under the premise that the death penalty is cruel. I'm not taking away props to the Obama admin for taking out a monster, good on them. I'm asking why wasn't this other monster that terrorized our lives here in the DMV also not put down?

[daoneandonly]

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/funding-medicare-for-all-taxes-rich-impossible-study