Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 90 of 189

Thread: Can American conservatism survive intact & unadulterated?

  1. #61
    Senior Member RandBlade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    14,793
    Only if they have reduced state pensions. If the very expensive medical treatment they get (and we're getting better at treating cancer though its expensive) then they don't.

    I note you ignored the point that pollution is not a moral issue. The particulates from petrol and diesel exhausts cause major health issues especially in smoggy cities.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer View Post
    Being upset is understandable, but be upset at yourself for poor planning, not at the world by acting like a spoiled bitch during an interview.

  2. #62
    Quote Originally Posted by RandBlade View Post
    If the very expensive medical treatment they get (and we're getting better at treating cancer though its expensive) then they don't.
    Remember, we have health insurance, not health coverage. If you used a venn diagram to map when early cancer diagnosis is commonly out of reach against those that have the most trouble quitting tobacco, you'd pretty much have a circle.
    "In a field where an overlooked bug could cost millions, you want people who will speak their minds, even if they’re sometimes obnoxious about it."

  3. #63
    SEÑOR Member Aimless's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    13,755
    “Humanity's greatest advances are not in its discoveries, but in how those discoveries are applied to reduce inequity.”
    — Bill Gates

  4. #64
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    6,724
    Quote Originally Posted by RandBlade View Post
    Only if they have reduced state pensions. If the very expensive medical treatment they get (and we're getting better at treating cancer though its expensive) then they don't.

    I note you ignored the point that pollution is not a moral issue. The particulates from petrol and diesel exhausts cause major health issues especially in smoggy cities.
    I don't know enough about the smog in cities to comment. It isn't a factor where I live and my desire to research the issue is minimal. That being said if you want to go with that argument, you'd want a local tax credit not a national one specifically targeted to the states/communities that need that.

  5. #65
    Senior Member RandBlade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    14,793
    Pollution effects everyone. It may be worst in smog-filled cities where the particulates are concentrated but they're not good in other areas either. The particulates that come out of diesel exhausts etc will still be there even when driving into say a rural school. Plus taxes work best when they are consistent over a reasonable area.

    I would rather have higher taxes on vehicles that emit unnecessary, damaging and deadly particulates that pollute the air we breath and give a tax cut to income tax, corporation taxes etc than the other way around. You?
    Quote Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer View Post
    Being upset is understandable, but be upset at yourself for poor planning, not at the world by acting like a spoiled bitch during an interview.

  6. #66
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    6,724
    Quote Originally Posted by RandBlade View Post

    I would rather have higher taxes on vehicles that emit unnecessary, damaging and deadly particulates that pollute the air we breath and give a tax cut to income tax, corporation taxes etc than the other way around. You?
    I'm opposed to the government influencing behavior this way. As it becomes commonly accepted (and it already has) it makes it easier for corruption to exist in politics and for parts of the economy to be manipulated to the benefit of the few as opposed to a true free market system. Crony capitalism is incredibly inefficient and there is far too much of it on the left and the right. Localized issues can be tolerated if the X behavior leads to Y outcome is crystal clear. Smog in a city is a potential example (see places like China and a few US cities).

  7. #67
    Senior Member GGT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    18,500
    Lewk, since when is it a 'conservative' principle to use state government and legislation to threaten a business when they end a perk, like the discount for NRA members?

  8. #68
    Local talking head LittleFuzzy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    5,629
    Quote Originally Posted by Aimless View Post
    It is. Empty verbiage from someone who does not, in fact, have any ability whatsoever to kill tax legislation.
    Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"

  9. #69
    Senior Member GGT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    18,500
    But words matter. Even "empty verbiage" from one GA legislator can go viral, and turn into moving Delta HQ to another state, taking some 30,000 jobs with it.

    Don't forget that many large multi-national corporations were enticed to states with big tax breaks in the first place (Lewk).

  10. #70
    SEÑOR Member Aimless's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    13,755
    Quote Originally Posted by LittleFuzzy View Post
    It is. Empty verbiage from someone who does not, in fact, have any ability whatsoever to kill tax legislation.
    He had some help:

    http://www.businessinsider.com/georg...ith-nra-2018-3
    “Humanity's greatest advances are not in its discoveries, but in how those discoveries are applied to reduce inequity.”
    — Bill Gates

  11. #71
    SEÑOR Member Aimless's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    13,755
    “Humanity's greatest advances are not in its discoveries, but in how those discoveries are applied to reduce inequity.”
    — Bill Gates

  12. #72
    SEÑOR Member Aimless's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    13,755
    I've avoided posting updates to this thread lately because there's just too much to say. However, I couldn't resist this delicious piece of awk:

    “Humanity's greatest advances are not in its discoveries, but in how those discoveries are applied to reduce inequity.”
    — Bill Gates

  13. #73
    Local talking head LittleFuzzy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    5,629
    The GOP doesn't seem to understand they're the party in power and not the Opposition anymore.
    Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"

  14. #74
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Amsterdam/Istanbul
    Posts
    9,888
    That is an extremely dangerous misconception ; they know that very well, but they are not willing to play a game that could find them out of power again.
    Greece shows us that there is a kind of politician worse than the ones that break their election promises; the ones that keep their election promises.

  15. #75
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    6,724
    Quote Originally Posted by Aimless View Post
    I've avoided posting updates to this thread lately because there's just too much to say. However, I couldn't resist this delicious piece of awk:

    Justice shouldn't stop just because the person is politically dead. If Hillary Clinton was guilty of mishandling classified information and then lying about it then you do want her to go to jail, yes?

  16. #76
    Senior Member GGT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    18,500
    Quote Originally Posted by LittleFuzzy View Post
    The GOP doesn't seem to understand they're the party in power and not the Opposition anymore.
    Oh, they understand. But which faction within the GOP will control the party's power is still in question.

    If Republicanism becomes Trumpism, there's no good home for fiscal conservatives who care about debt or deficit, or those who value diplomacy and international relations before military intervention, etc. It's telling that so many (R) incumbents are retiring, and they only voice complaints about Trump when they're not running for re-election.

  17. #77
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Amsterdam/Istanbul
    Posts
    9,888
    Quote Originally Posted by Lewkowski View Post
    Justice shouldn't stop just because the person is politically dead. If Hillary Clinton was guilty of mishandling classified information and then lying about it then you do want her to go to jail, yes?
    Yeah let's play that game : If Donald were guilty of colluding with the Russians and accepting illegal campaign donations you do want him impeached then go to jail, yes?
    Greece shows us that there is a kind of politician worse than the ones that break their election promises; the ones that keep their election promises.

  18. #78
    Senior Member GGT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    18,500



    I don't know if a sitting president can be convicted of a felony or civil crime....but at the very least Trump "mishandled classified information" when he invited Russian diplomats into the oval office and divulged *top secret* Israeli intelligence. Wasn't that in the first month of his presidency?

  19. #79
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    6,724
    Quote Originally Posted by Hazir View Post
    Yeah let's play that game : If Donald were guilty of colluding with the Russians and accepting illegal campaign donations you do want him impeached then go to jail, yes?
    IF Donald were guilty of colluding with Russians, yes. Campaign donations is a bit dicier as if he 100% knew a donation was illegal, yes however campaigns are rather large and Trump doesn't seem to be a micro manager in that sort of thing.

  20. #80
    Senior Member GGT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    18,500
    No, Trump has "fixers" to do the dirty work. Plausible deniability and all that, for "The Donald".

  21. #81
    SEÑOR Member Aimless's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    13,755
    Quote Originally Posted by Lewkowski View Post
    Justice shouldn't stop just because the person is politically dead. If Hillary Clinton was guilty of mishandling classified information and then lying about it then you do want her to go to jail, yes?
    I understand how the thought of living in a fucking banana republic might appeal to one such as yourself, but please at least read articles before commenting on them. The list includes not only Clinton--who has already been extensively investigated--but a number of other officials who should not be under suspicion of committing any crime worthy of prosecution. This has nothing to do with any zeal for upholding principles of justice--the only objective is to satisfy their core constituency of benighted and increasingly bloodthirsty asshats by punishing representatives of their political opponents. Neither their intentions nor the effect of their actions further the cause of justice.
    “Humanity's greatest advances are not in its discoveries, but in how those discoveries are applied to reduce inequity.”
    — Bill Gates

  22. #82
    Senior Member GGT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    18,500
    Before we go too far off the tracks (about the future of conservatism), I want to ask Lewk if he thinks *social conservatives* would have focused on judicial appointments if they didn't already respect the Rule of Law and the DoJ?

    Because what we have now is a weird mixture of alt-right conservatives that have bought into the "Deep State" conspiracy theory that believes the DoJ, FBI, and all career civil servants have been "contaminated" somehow, that even the Rule of Law can no longer be trusted.

    Meanwhile, Trump derides his own appointees, sometimes throws them under the bus (UN Ambassador Haley the latest example) and feeds a mistrust in any agency that doesn't cater to his schizoid impulses, as expressed on Twitter.
    Last edited by GGT; 04-19-2018 at 07:53 AM.

  23. #83
    Senior Member RandBlade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    14,793
    Quote Originally Posted by LittleFuzzy View Post
    The GOP doesn't seem to understand they're the party in power and not the Opposition anymore.
    Hopefully the electorate will fix that for them.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer View Post
    Being upset is understandable, but be upset at yourself for poor planning, not at the world by acting like a spoiled bitch during an interview.

  24. #84
    Senior Member GGT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    18,500
    Quote Originally Posted by RandBlade View Post
    Hopefully the electorate will fix that for them.
    Like they hope to win a $3,000,000 lottery jackpot with one $5 ticket?

  25. #85
    Senior Member RandBlade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    14,793
    I'll gladly take a bet at 600,000/1 that the GOP will be in opposition in at least the House after November's elections.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer View Post
    Being upset is understandable, but be upset at yourself for poor planning, not at the world by acting like a spoiled bitch during an interview.

  26. #86
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    6,724
    Quote Originally Posted by Aimless View Post
    I understand how the thought of living in a fucking banana republic might appeal to one such as yourself, but please at least read articles before commenting on them. The list includes not only Clinton--who has already been extensively investigated--but a number of other officials who should not be under suspicion of committing any crime worthy of prosecution. This has nothing to do with any zeal for upholding principles of justice--the only objective is to satisfy their core constituency of benighted and increasingly bloodthirsty asshats by punishing representatives of their political opponents. Neither their intentions nor the effect of their actions further the cause of justice.
    The idea is that the Clinton case was badly mishandled due to the politics of the investigators. It is all about how multiple people in the FBI held one standard for Clinton and another for the Trump collusion nonsense.

    But I'll ask again. If you think Clinton lied while being investigated for mishandling classified information (IE obstruction of justice) if we just *assume* for the sake of argument she is guilty of this, do you think prosecution is warrented?

  27. #87
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    6,724
    Quote Originally Posted by GGT View Post
    Before we go too far off the tracks (about the future of conservatism), I want to ask Lewk if he thinks *social conservatives* would have focused on judicial appointments if they didn't already respect the Rule of Law and the DoJ?

    Because what we have now is a weird mixture of alt-right conservatives that have bought into the "Deep State" conspiracy theory that believes the DoJ, FBI, and all career civil servants have been "contaminated" somehow, that even the Rule of Law can no longer be trusted.

    Meanwhile, Trump derides his own appointees, sometimes throws them under the bus (UN Ambassador Haley the latest example) and feeds a mistrust in any agency that doesn't cater to his schizoid impulses, as expressed on Twitter.
    Eh? Almost every conservative says they are for the rule of law (and most liberals too). If the law is being subverted due to political leanings and personal bias you would want your own appointees in there to fix it.

    As far as Trump is concerned, yeah he throws his own people under the boss because he's an asshole with a short attention span. You won't find me defending everything Trump does. From his ridiculous tariffs to his stupid use of twitter he is FAR FAR from the ideal president. I would take Bush Sr, GWB, or Reagan over him in a heartbeat.

  28. #88
    Resiste et Mords! Steely Glint's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    4,457
    Quote Originally Posted by RandBlade View Post
    I'll gladly take a bet at 600,000/1 that the GOP will be in opposition in at least the House after November's elections.
    Fucking jinxed it again​.
    If you tolerate this, then your children will be next.

  29. #89
    Senior Member GGT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    18,500
    Quote Originally Posted by Lewkowski View Post
    Eh? Almost every conservative says they are for the rule of law (and most liberals too). If the law is being subverted due to political leanings and personal bias you would want your own appointees in there to fix it.
    What makes you think the law is being subverted due to political leanings and personal bias?

    BTW, appointees are supposed to uphold the constitution and prosecute existing laws, NOT just do a president's bidding. Positions like head of FBI have long tenures, can overlap administrations, and are filled by 'career civil servants' regardless of political party. That's why they're vetted with congressional hearings.

    No, you're talking like one of those "Lock her up" partisans. That was bad enough for a campaign, but wanting to jail political opponents is NOT the democratic way.

  30. #90
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    6,724
    Quote Originally Posted by GGT View Post
    What makes you think the law is being subverted due to political leanings and personal bias?

    BTW, appointees are supposed to uphold the constitution and prosecute existing laws, NOT just do a president's bidding. Positions like head of FBI have long tenures, can overlap administrations, and are filled by 'career civil servants' regardless of political party. That's why they're vetted with congressional hearings.

    No, you're talking like one of those "Lock her up" partisans. That was bad enough for a campaign, but wanting to jail political opponents is NOT the democratic way.
    If she broke the law, do you think she should go to jail? Or do you want to give her a pass because 'we don't jail political opponents.'

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •