• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

PoliGAF 2014 |OT| Kay Hagan and the Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad News

Status
Not open for further replies.

The Technomancer

card-carrying scientician
Awesome. Where's the downside?

Wealth is power. There is no conceivable system you can devise in which the concept of wealth is still intact but wealth is not power. The two are synonyms. The whole point of wealth is that it has value because other people desire it, which puts you in a position to leverage your wealth to influence others behavior. When children inherit wealth without having to display any measure of worth you contribute exactly to the consolidation of power that you claim to have such a problem with.

Seriously, how the hell can you have a problem with the idea of a plutocracy but be fine with full inheritance? Again, historical plutocracies (and their cousins, monarchies) arose because of the familial concentration of wealth.
 

AntoneM

Member
I swear benjipwns is using definitions of word that are either far removed from thier generally accepted meaning at this time, or are completely made up. For instance I have no clue what he means by "elites" or "the elite" when he argues that taking money from the estates of wealthy people further enriches elites.

I've stopped trying.
 

benjipwns

Banned
If their money is in the bank/market/investments, they're contributing to SOCIETY by providing funding for others. If their money is donated or some other foundation like the Gates, they're contributing to society by providing funding for others. If their money is thrown away on drugs, cars, houses, buying back sex videos and snatch shots, they're contributing to society by purchasing goods and services. If they're throwing it away on politics, well, we all make mistakes.

Taking the wealth, destroying it through bureaucracy and distributing the ashes doesn't contribute as much to society as providing access to the continuing wealth does.
 

The Technomancer

card-carrying scientician
If their money is in the bank/market/investments, they're contributing to SOCIETY by providing funding for others. If their money is donated or some other foundation like the Gates, they're contributing to society by providing funding for others. If their money is thrown away on drugs, cars, houses, buying back sex videos and snatch shots, they're contributing to society by purchasing goods and services. If they're throwing it away on politics, well, we all make mistakes.

Taking the wealth, destroying it through bureaucracy and distributing the ashes doesn't contribute as much to society as providing access to the continuing wealth does.

You have a very weirdly narrow definition of "access" if "access" means literally only "sitting in a bank so that it can be lent out"
 
T

thepotatoman

Unconfirmed Member
If their money is in the bank/market/investments, they're contributing to SOCIETY by providing funding for others. If their money is donated or some other foundation like the Gates, they're contributing to society by providing funding for others. If their money is thrown away on drugs, cars, houses, buying back sex videos and snatch shots, they're contributing to society by purchasing goods and services. If they're throwing it away on politics, well, we all make mistakes.

Taking the wealth, destroying it through bureaucracy and distributing the ashes doesn't contribute as much to society as providing access to the continuing wealth does.

Apparently government employees are somehow the only group of people in the entire United States that somehow don't put the money they make back into the economy.
 

benjipwns

Banned
And all the other manners of access I mentioned.

Apparently government employees are somehow the only group of people in the entire United States that somehow don't put the money they make back into the economy.
Uh, they don't make any extra wealth, they just reshuffle existing wealth around.
 

The Technomancer

card-carrying scientician
Uh, they don't make any extra wealth, they just reshuffle existing wealth around.

if investing in a company so that it can grow and prosper counts as "creating wealth" then building an infrastructure such as highways or providing education that leads to skilled workers is "creating wealth" in the same way. In both cases resources are provided to private endeavors.
 

benjipwns

Banned
if investing in a company so that it can grow and prosper counts as "creating wealth" then building an infrastructure such as highways or providing education that leads to skilled workers is "creating wealth" in the same way. In both cases resources are provided to private endeavors.
In the former case, resources are provided willingly, in the latter case confiscated resources are directed there against the will and interest of society.
 

The Technomancer

card-carrying scientician
In the former case, resources are provided willingly, in the latter case confiscated resources are directed there against the will and interest of society.

That's beside the point (and I disagree in any case, depending on what definition of society you use). You said the government employees do not operate to create extra wealth
 

benjipwns

Banned
That's beside the point (and I disagree in any case, depending on what definition of society you use). You said the government employees do not operate to create extra wealth
Right they're taking wealth in this case and spending on something they want, it doesn't necessarily create wealth. Especially if the highway is a bridge to nowhere or the education turns out students worse than when they entered. Or if it's dropped on a bunch of countries to help them learn democracy.

It's possible it could by accident create wealth same as the natural market, but in that case there was no need to seize it as society/the people would have eventually pursued it. It's just shuffled the time.
 

The Technomancer

card-carrying scientician
Right they're taking wealth in this case and spending on something they want, it doesn't necessarily create wealth. Especially if the highway is a bridge to nowhere or the education turns out students worse than when they entered. Or if it's dropped on a bunch of countries to help them learn democracy.

It's possible it could by accident create wealth same as the natural market, but in that case there was no need to seize it as society/the people would have eventually pursued it. It's just shuffled the time.

Every one of those objections can be leveled at your private systems as well. Wealth can be stored overseas where it isn't even used for lending. It can be given to foundations that squander it or invested in companies that fail and don't increase overall wealth.

This is without even touching the idea that the market is the most efficient distributer of goods, services, and wealth. I don't know how anyone can look at the development of healthcare in this country compared to the development of healthcare in other countries that made the transition away from market-driven healthcare and come to the conclusion that private entities were more efficient at providing people with what they required.
 
It's getting too serious in here.

Freshman Congressman Mistakes Senior Government Officials for Foreigners

biswal.jpg


In an intensely awkward congressional hearing of the House Foreign Affairs Committee on Thursday, freshman Rep. Curt Clawson misidentified two senior U.S. government officials as representatives of the Indian government.

The two officials, Nisha Biswal and Arun Kumar, are Americans who hold senior positions at the State Department and Commerce Department, respectively. Although both Biswal and Kumar were introduced as U.S. officials by the chairman of the Asia and Pacific subcommittee, Clawson repeatedly asked them questions about "your country" and "your government," in reference to the state of India.

"I'm familiar with your country; I love your country," the Florida Republican said. "Anything I can do to make the relationship with India better, I'm willing and enthusiastic about doing so."

Apparently confused by their Indian surnames and skin color, Clawson also asked if "their" government could loosen restrictions on U.S. capital investments in India.
"I think your question is to the Indian government," Biswal said. "We certainly share your sentiment, and we certainly will advocate that on behalf of the U.S."
During the hearing, he repeatedly touted his deep knowledge of the Indian subcontinent and his favorite Bollywood movies. None of his fellow colleagues publicly called him out on the oversight -- perhaps going easy on him because he's the new guy.

The Tea Party-backed lawmaker won a special election last month to fill the seat of Trey Radel, who resigned after being convicted for cocaine possession.
 

benjipwns

Banned
Where is EV?
I saw he's not banned anymore, he was making some posts about the Ukranian rebels in the Malaysian plane thread.


Every one of those objections can be leveled at your private systems as well. Wealth can be stored overseas where it isn't even used for lending. It can be given to foundations that squander it or invested in companies that fail and don't increase overall wealth.

This is without even touching the idea that the market is the most efficient distributer of goods, services, and wealth.
It's not efficiency or growth even that matters, it's the voluntary aspect that's most important. As that portends the best chances for the former.

I don't know how anyone can look at the development of healthcare in this country compared to the development of healthcare in other countries that made the transition away from market-driven healthcare and come to the conclusion that private entities were more efficient at providing people with what they required.
I don't know how anyone can look at the development of healthcare in this country and consider it market-driven for at least the last 65 years. CON, tax treatment, HMOs, Medicare's pricing dominance, state regulations and barriers, etc.

Of course any kind of monopolized system is going to "work" better than a Frankenstein monster. (He was just misunderstood too.)
 

The Technomancer

card-carrying scientician
I saw he's not banned anymore, he was making some posts about the Ukranian rebels in the Malaysian plane thread.



It's not efficiency or growth even that matters, it's the voluntary aspect that's most important. As that portends the best chances for the former.

Important by what metric? The human spirit? I prefer statistics
 

benjipwns

Banned
Important by what metric? The human spirit? I prefer statistics
You can make GDP go up and unemployment go down by having the state conscript people to dig and throw money into a pit, that doesn't make anyone wealthier.

Though I do love the money fires!

One last thing and I'll stop shitting everyones day up and leave the thread to the serious politk posters.
Hmmm...why might somebody like Warren Buffet want estate taxes...he's a member of the elite isn't he? I forget...
More people should learn about Berkshire Hathaway's business.

And why it owns Dairy Queen to pick one example.
 

Wilsongt

Member
From the American views on Israel/Gaza thread:
Hannity tries to top: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1V5L3lyZ9p8

With: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PgeeXlLyKvM

Yawn. Hannity is getting so predictable. He invites someone who he knows his base hates/dislikes and when those people speak, he proceeds to speak over them.

I guess with Bachmann tossing the idea around of running for president again, we're going to have to get used to her talking about this bullshit for a few years.

In an interview this week with the host of a conservative radio show, Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) said the gay community wants to "do away with statutory rape laws so that adults will be able to freely prey on little children sexually."

The interview on the “Faith & Liberty” show -- which took place on Wednesday, according to the Huffington Post -- covered a wide range of political topics as well as culture in the U.S., mostly focusing on gay marriage. When host Dave Garrison asked the congresswoman whether an “intolerance” exists for people who disagree with gay marriage, Bachmann agreed, saying that’s “exactly where we are now.”

Yes, because rape only includes statutory.
 

Wilsongt

Member
...Oh.

Conservative filmmaker Dinesh D’Souza may be getting an influx of new viewers of his documentary film ‘America’ after a Republican state senator from Florida said he plans on introducing a bill to make the movie mandatory in public schools.

Republican Alan Hays, inspired after seeing the movie in theaters, said he now plans on introducing a one-page bill in November which would require all 1,700 Florida high schools and middle schools to show the movie to their students, unless their parents choose to opt them out. The documentary film is a conservative-spin on American history focusing on elevating the “essential goodness of America” while discrediting criticisms about American’s checkered history with civil rights and social justice. It’s not completely inconceivable for the bill to pass the Republican-controlled Florida legislature and be signed into law by Republican Gov. Rick Scott.

http://thinkprogress.org/media/2014...dinesh-dsouzas-america-every-florida-student/

If the GOP is going to circle jerk a movie, they should at least have it come from someone who isn't facing felony charges.
 

Tamanon

Banned
I like that Vox basically took away any reason to go to ThinkProgress. Vox is excellence distilled compared to some of the other sites.
 
I'm glad thinkprogress is there to tell us of every stupid bill that had no chance of passing

Well even if it has no chance of passing, it is quite illustrative of the mindset of some people.

I mean really now . . . where is the 'free market' here? Let's force kids to watch a bad fictional movie to enrich our crony and ideological supporter! That is amazingly corrupt.
 
...Oh.



http://thinkprogress.org/media/2014...dinesh-dsouzas-america-every-florida-student/

If the GOP is going to circle jerk a movie, they should at least have it come from someone who isn't facing felony charges.

An independent commission needs to do an investigation into whether the White House and Justice Department purposely trumped up charges against him in order to increase his book sales. Just a few months ago his book and movie were looking like bombs, now they're huge hits.

Maybe he knows so much about Obama's father because he's Obama's lost brother, and this is all one big money scam.
 

Oblivion

Fetishing muscular manly men in skintight hosery
Can't on know but Gruber is on record saying the intent was for states that didn't set up exchanges to not get subsidies. And he helped write the law.

I agree with your position but Gruber's statement really took me aback.

The entire right wing noise machine is gloating like crazy about that Gruber piece, but it's so fucking weird that they're celebrating such a thing. Think about it. They are in fact, making the argument that the evil, big government, wealth redistributing, socialist dictator and his Democrat minions, designed the law to INTENTIONALLY cut off a huge portion of poor people from receiving help from the government. In other words, Obama wanted LESS people dependent on government subsidies. Does that make any fucking sense?

It's just like when Romney and Ryan were hammering Obama for cutting medicare. These fucks don't give a shit about their own goddamned talking points as long as it results in them being able to attack Obama(care).

I would hope that smarter, less batshit insane conservatives like Metamorpheus would realize how cynical these people are the next time he tries to defend them.
 
Weren't the GOP whining about Obama indoctrination of school kids because he made some pre-recored message to schools? But making a literal GOP propaganda movie just short of mandatory for school kids is OK?
The classic Rovian tactic is to accuse your opponent of something you're actually doing.

Also employed by cheating husbands.
 

Diablos

Member
Is this about EPA v. EME Homer City Generation? In that case, Scalia didn't "rule against himself." He misstated the EPA's argument in a prior case (by confusing it with the argument of the other party in that case). But in both cases, Scalia said the EPA couldn't do what it was trying to do in EME Homer.
Yes.


Har. If you say so.

lmao...

ACA's success or failure is still up for grabs!
 

Oblivion

Fetishing muscular manly men in skintight hosery
I'm from florida, this won't pass.

Scary conservative click baiting headlines on things that have no chance of ever coming to pass on MY ThinkProgress? Surely you jest!

I like that Vox basically took away any reason to go to ThinkProgress. Vox is excellence distilled compared to some of the other sites.

I hope you guys aren't seriously trying to argue that we shouldn't bring attention to Republican idiocy just cause said idiocy "may" not have any real world consequences.
 

Cat

Member
I like that Vox basically took away any reason to go to ThinkProgress. Vox is excellence distilled compared to some of the other sites.

Is Vox really that good? Anyone else, what do you think? I ask sincerely since I do follow ThinkProgress a little.
 

Mike M

Nick N
Is Vox really that good? Anyone else, what do you think? I ask sincerely since I do follow ThinkProgress a little.
Their color scheme is awful.

I get that it's supposed to look like a highlighter, but it makes me want to put out my eyes.
 
Is Vox really that good? Anyone else, what do you think? I ask sincerely since I do follow ThinkProgress a little.

Vox is good if you want your milquetoast center-left liberalism without any actual anger toward conservatism. Basically, it's the NPR of news sites.
 
We shouldn't highlight ever stupid thing a state rep says.

Why not? You know how conservatism won despite most people opposed most of their policies if you actually used them? Because they made the average swing voter from 1980 to about 2006 believe that the average Democrat was a mixture of Jane Fonda, Gloria Steinem, Jesse Jackson, and the asshole professor you hated.

People don't respond to data and numbers. They respond to be fearful of the other side winning, then liking what they get from the side they voted for doing stuff for them.
 

benjipwns

Banned
http://freebeacon.com/national-security/white-house-wants-repeal-of-iraq-war-authorization/
Rice's letter: http://freebeacon.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/3989-Boehner.pdf
The Obama administration is calling on Congress to fully repeal the war authorization in Iraq to ensure that no U.S. troops return to the country, which is under siege by the extremist Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL or ISIS).

White House national security adviser Susan Rice petitioned Speaker of the House John Boehner (R., Ohio) in a letter Friday to completely repeal the war authorization, officially known as the Authorization for Use of Military Force in Iraq, or AUMF.

Rice’s letter was sent as Congress just hours before it approved a resolution opposing U.S. military intervention in Iraq, where the terrorist group ISIL claims to have established an Islamic caliphate.

“We believe a more appropriate and timely action for Congress to take is the repeal of the outdated 2002 Authorization for Use of Military Force in Iraq,” Rice wrote, according to a copy of her letter obtained by the Washington Free Beacon.

“With American combat troops having completed their withdrawal from Iraq on December 18, 2011, the Iraq AUMF is no longer used for any U.S. government activities and the administration fully supports its repeal,” Rice wrote. “Such a repeal would go much further in giving the American people confidence that ground forces will not be sent into combat in Iraq.”

...

"When Speaker Boehner told me about Ms. Rice’s letter, I thought he was joking,” said Rep. Buck McKeon (R., Calif.), chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, in a statement.

“Obama Administration officials are warning us daily that the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS) is ‘worse than al-Qaeda’ and an extreme threat to the American people,” McKeon said. “The American people aren’t worried that the president will send the military back to Iraq. They’re worried about a deadly terrorist state that can hit us from Wall Street to Main Street. They’re worried that this president refuses to do anything, at anytime, in any way, to stop the flood of national security crises that are popping up around the globe.”

The Senate has sought several times in the past years to reconsider the AUMFs pertaining to Iraq and Afghanistan as both wars winded down.

Senate Democrats have expressed a willingness to repeal the Iraq AUMF, a move that critics say would be dangerous to the United States’ ongoing fight against terror.

A repeal of the war authority could also be a boon for ISIL and would send a clear sign that the United States is not willing to stop the militant group from making gains.

“There is no strong reason to change the AUMF,” John Yoo, a former deputy assistant attorney general in the Bush administration, told the Free Beacon earlier this year, when the Senate was considering altering the AUMFs. “Over the last 13 years, all three branches have constructed a common understanding and series of practices around the AUMF in fighting the war on terror.”

“You break the dam to some extent if you break the AUMF,” a senior Senate aide also said at the time.

Congress should “tread carefully because the war on terror is not over and won’t be soon,” the source said. “You could start us down a path of repeal that you can’t turn back.”

“This isn’t just absurd. We’re past absurd. This is dangerous,” said Rep. McKeon. “This administration is fiddling while the world burns, and now they’re demanding Congress play with them.”
lol John Yoo
 

Because it's more than often just a liberal circle jerk that nobody else cares about? Sometimes a Todd Akin emerges who becomes a national story, but more often than not Daily Kos, this thread, Media Matters, etc spend a whole lot of time focusing on stuff that no one is outraged about except for a few liberals.

I've pretty much disengaged from most liberal blogs because it just boils down to either "x said y and the so called liberal media isn't reporting it!" or "why x isn't really bad news for Obama/democrats/etc." Meanwhile the president's polls crash on nearly every issue. Hispanics aren't happy about his handling of the border "crisis," which really makes me think they'll throw a hail marry on that immigration executive order and thus fuck over red state democrats.
 

benjipwns

Banned
which really makes me think they'll throw a hail marry on that immigration executive order and thus fuck over red state democrats.
Not so fast:
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Govern...eachment-if-obama-unilaterally-grants-amnesty
As is always the case with anything involving former-Alaska Governor Sarah Palin, our unbiased, objective, not-at-all-liberal media couldn't wait to mock her impeachment case against President Obama -- but not everyone is laughing. According to reporting from The Hill, The White House fears exactly that should the president take executive action to grant amnesty to thousands of illegals.
Senior White House advisers are taking very seriously the possibility that Republicans in Congress will try to impeach President Obama, especially if he takes executive action to slow deportations.
Dan Pfeiffer, a senior adviser to Obama, said Friday that the White House is taking the prospect of impeachment in the GOP-controlled House more seriously than many others in Washington, who see it as unlikely.
Obama's senior advisor, Dan Pfeiffer, as quoted by The Hill: "I saw a poll today that had a huge portion of the Republican Party base saying they supported impeaching the president. A lot of people in this town laugh that off. I would not discount that possibility.”

Writing for Breitbart News earlier this month, Governor Palin made a Constitutional case for Obama's impeachment based in large part on the ongoing border crisis. "Without borders, there is no nation," Palin writes. "Obama knows this. Opening our borders to a flood of illegal immigrants is deliberate."
original.jpg

Four years ago in 2010
“If President Obama were to sign an executive order giving illegal aliens amnesty, his career would be over and an impeachment movement would explode.”
- Bill O'Reilly Jun 27, 2010

Two years ago in 2012
"In an election-year policy change, the Obama administration said it will stop deporting young illegal immigrants" - CNN June 2012
"Obama Permits Young Migrants to Remain in U.S." - NYTimes
"Secretary Napolitano Announces Deferred Action Process"

One year ago in 2013
Obama spreads leaflets In Mexico encouraging welfare fraud by illegals
"Program in all 50 Mexican consulates push food stamps in US" - Dailymail

This year in 2014
Obama fosters national security threat - RFP: Escort Services for 65,000 Unaccompanied Alien Children - Homeland Security Jan 2014

"Palin right about impeaching Obama" - Mark Levin
"Just Impeach Corrupt Officials" - Andy McCarthy
"Sarah Palin is right about impeaching President Obama
- Ruth Marcus Washington Post Jul 15, 2014

Premeditated acts to subvert the rule of law by endangering the health, safety, and property of Americans is an impeachable offense!
original.jpg
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom