Home Mail MemberMap Chat (0) Wallpapers
Go Back   ChiefsPlanet > The Ed & Dave Lounge > D.C.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 06-26-2013, 12:47 AM  
Direckshun Direckshun is offline
Black for Palestine
 
Direckshun's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Springpatch
Casino cash: $5832
The Shit Direckshun Thinks About These Days

Hey folks. Been awhile. I know you've been missing me dearly, but life's been in the way (and my football interest has peaked recently).

So I thought we could go the expedient route and just make this a catch-all thread for some of the political thoughts I've had kicking around in my head this past week. Feel free to ignore this thread, or reply to any or all of the following fifteen (!) topics I'm going to brush against.

We're overdue for a hoedown. This way, we can do our usual dance to catch up on the old days, and dream about a day when we can revisit them again. Now, wouldn't that be nice?

1. George Zimmerman. We really should just do the sensible thing here and bury the goddamn topic. There is no point to discussing Zimmerman except airing out thinly veiled racial resentment. That's it. That's the whole reason this thing is a story to begin with, and it's the only reason Zimmerman is receiving any airtime to begin with. This is no doubt a genuinely distressing story, but it's nothing that changes America in any significant way, and it should be confined to the margins of news rather than receiving significant airtime. It's nakedly about race.

2. Sarah Murnaghan. Probably the most outrageous thing Fox News has aired over the past month or so has been its coverage of Murnaghan, a 10-year-old girl who needed a lung transplant. A ton of adorable footage of this brave little girl was splashed all over Fox News as a way to paint Kathleen Sebelius and the HHS Department as a bunch of heartless assholes for denying her family's request to fast-track her onto the adult waiting list, which cuts off at age 12. This whole story was a partisan cheapshot against the Obama administration, nothing more.

But lost in the whole story, of course, was what is common sense among absolutely any of your friends that work in healthcare: if this little girl gets an adult pair of lungs, that means somebody else doesn't get that pair of lungs. And Fox News took up the gauntlet for this girl simply because she's a beautiful little girl who could make the HHS look bad. But giving her a pair of lungs that her body may not even be able to accept means you've denied giving those lungs to adults who would be far more able to survive with them.

I'm not saying that it's wrong her family wanted to fast-track her, nor that she eventually has received a lung transplant. I'm saying it's wrong to politicize that, because you're unfairly taking one person's side because she's a little cute girl, rather than anybody else's side who need those lungs just as bad, and aren't getting airtime or major network support because they aren't cute enough to make HHS look bad. Reporting on this story was incredibly unethical and ignorant.

3. SCOTUS ruling on the Voting Rights Act. This ruling made no sense to me. It read like borderline nonsense, and I've been a big supporter of John Roberts since he was appointed in 2006 or so.

The formula for determining discriminatory districts was shot down as unconstitutional because it was outdated, and Congress should revisit it to modernize it. First of all, this is the very model of judicial activism. So anybody applauding this outcome: any future arguments you craft against judicial activism are hereby robbed of any agency.

But that's not why the ruling is nonsense. The ruling is nonsense because Congress has revisited the VRA as recently as 2006, and re-approved it, along with the formula, with sweeping bipartisan majorities. If that's not revisiting the formula and deeming it worthy of the 21st century, nothing is.

4. Eric Snowden. I'm loving all the vindication for Glenn Greenwald these days -- nobody has been a braver voice of sanity than his for the past decade in journalism. That said, I applaud the revelations that Snowden has made possible, and I understand his exodus to escape, with how aggressively Obama has gone after whistleblowers (something I've long loathed, openly, on this very forum). As for whether he's treasonous or heroic, I claim that is a false dichotomy. I do not believe that America is infallible, and exposing/resisting wrongs that it has allowed to be legal is the very definition of civil disobedience.

That said: it's transparent that the same rightwing establishment that didn't give two shits about Bradley Manning (and in many cases, blatant hostility) is now fawning over Snowden as an unequivocable American hero. They're both heroes in civil disobedience. Manning stayed country side and has endured undue, cruel and unusual punishment for his civil disobedience, and now we see where that leads us: with another future whistleblower in Russia, getting pumped for information by Putin. This is why you treat whistleblowers ethically: because when you don't, you only hurt your own country's interests.

That said, if you're banging the drum on how awesome Snowden is, you honestly have to ask yourself how you regarded Bradley Manning. If you're reacting to them differently, then congratulations: you care more about party than about what's best for the country.

5. The GOP's immigration reform problem. I'm not sure that even putting Republican faces all over sensible immigration reform (which is what the Senate bill is: very sensible, though I'd go farther) is going to help their prospects in the short- and medium-run with Latino voters. The damage almost seems done, even as Fox News does its best to promote the bill. The GOP base is so seething angry over anything approaching amnesty, that the House will almost certainly come out with a plan that will rile up Hispanics.

I still think immigration reform will pass in 2013. Probably around Christmas. And it will look almost exactly like the Senate bill. But this overheated rhetoric about Mexicans and shit is absolutely killing the GOP's chances with the Hispanic demographic -- which, let's face it, is the only real reason they're diving into this anyway.

6. The sins of the State Department. Like Eric Snowden/Bradley Manning, there is a naked, partisan double standard here when we hold the State Department to task for its sins of the Benghazi cluster**** and the recent breaking rumors about prostitution and the like in the department. I call it a double standard, because whatever the sins of State is in these stories are often committed in much more serious and grotesque ways in the Defense Department.

It's common knowledge that American personnel drive the prostitution industries of every country we're stationed in, and like the State Department with Benghazi, often make erroneous judgments in allocating resources that end up with weakened bases that get attacked and/or overran.

This of course is not to excuse the State Department for its problems, as common place as they've always been (in the case of the prostitution shit), or how critical they may be (Benghazi). But we give the Defense Department a free pass for nearly goddamn everything, because, well, it's Defense, and we don't want to look like pussies for pointing out that the Defense Department is an overpriced boondoggle factory that is run by stockholders in contracting companies that often make historically pathetic judgments in executing orders and allocating resources and a mixed history at best in mingling with foreign populations.

7. Infrastructure investment. I really think we need another stimulus package -- not necessarily in the same vein as the first, but to fix the horrendous conditions many of our bridges and intersections are in. I don't even care if its deficit funded. Americans could lose their lives to these in droves, and the construction work will help drive the economic recovery. This needs to get done -- why won't it? Because it requires our historically inept Congress (thanks to the near-total impotence of the Republican House) to approve.

8. Syria. So the Obama administration has decided to take sides in the Syria conflict. I don't blame them, and I actually applaud them for taking the right side this time against the dictator, rather than propping Assad up as we have other dictators in the region.

I don't like the strategy, though. I wish we approached Syria as we approached Libya, but that would make too much sense I suppose. Instead, we are going to funnel in an inadequate amount of arms to a band of rebels who are slowly starting to lose their footing now that Iran and Hezbollah have jumped in.

Except that's exactly why we did it. Fareed Zakaria suggested that the American strategy is to bleed Hezbollah and Iran of their resources and energy by making the Syrian opposition they're hoping to fight even more resilient. The goal, Zakaria says, isn't to promote Syrian democracy, but instead to drain Iran/Hezbollah of resources. I think this explanation best describes the administration's policy, but it is ****ing unethical shit. We are essentially writing off certain escalations in civilian deaths without helping to actually topple Assad in any meaningful way, to simply weaken Iran.

9. Climate change. Glad to see the President push for climate control shit more these days, here in his second term, including his speech today on all the executive branch plans to do on the subject. I'd like to see Congress act on this, and it probably could in the Senate, but absolutely nothing sensible on climate change could emerge out of the cluster**** of the current House.

Basically, this needs to be a long-game push. It can't get done with this current Congress, so Obama, Democrats/Republicans who want this done, and climatologists need to amp up on this subject as much as possible to make it a major issue in 2016 for Clinton vs. Christie. I want the candidates to get hit with questions on climate change in the debates, I want them to be able to explain it in the primaries, and ultimately drive up the public pressure on this platform so that it gets done within this decade. Hopefully, it won't be too late.

10. The Beveridge Curve. Economic predictions keep coming in for the next several years, and it's still looking pretty good for 2014. The Beveridge curve, which I've posted about, predicted that the economy would recover like gangbusters in that year. And, well, with the sequester hitting (more on that in a moment), "gangbusters" is probably not an option at this point but a healthy recovery rather than the crawling one we're currently experiencing still seems likely:
Quote:
  • Job openings are increasing, but the unemployment rate is not.
  • There are threey key reasons for this: "a mismatch between the skills of unemployed workers and the available jobs; incentives from extended unemployment insurance that have slowed the incentive to take available jobs; and heightened uncertainty over the future course of the economy and economic policy"
  • These three factors have a historical tendency of correcting themselves over time.
  • By early 2014, the curve will have righted itself, and unemployment will drop like a rock.
Well, here's hoping.
11. "The Five." Anybody else watch this show on Fox News? This is probably one of the dumbest shows on television, and it highlights my problem with Fox News: it's just run by teenagers. It's partisanship is blatant, but at this point you're just going to get what you're going to get at this point. But it's just blatantly run by teenagers who don't know how to conduct sensible journalism.

The dude in the middle, whatever his name is, is the only one with any journalistic credibility at all. Despite his partisan slant, and it is atrociously obvious, he's the only one with a prayer of raising any astute criticisms of the Obama administration -- especially pathetic because co-host Dana Perino was once the ****ing press secretary for the Bush administration.

12. GOP extremism, vol. XXCL. There are several weights on the economy right now, but one is especially stupid because it's self-imposed: the sequester. The sequester is destroying public jobs by the thousands, and annihilating a ton of public investments which have always been critical to drive research and help the economy perform.

So, let's fix that. The Democratic proposal is to reverse the sequester, and eliminate it. Eliminate its cuts to domestic programs, and eliminate its cuts to defense. That's sensible, since it was a wound it inflicted upon the economy that we created, we could equally un-create it.

The GOP suggestion to replace the sequester is to bring back the military spending by doubling-down on the domestic cuts. I'm not shitting you. The domestic cuts, which help the economy grow, help keep Americans healthy, and fund shit tons of research that has historically kept the country on the cutting edge of science and technology, which were intentionally designed to be so stupid that it would compel action rather than see them come into place, are to be doubled. How this is a reasonable plan for anybody outside of the bubble is beyond me, and it highlights why this GOP House is simply unable to get anything done.

13. The Farm Bill cluster****. Once again, it seems the House GOP can't sit down without squashing its own nutsack. It refused to agree to cuts in food stamps and cuts in farmer subsidies because they weren't cut enough.

Listen, I hear ya'll with the farmer subsidies. I think they are among the worst expenditures of government dollars in the country. It's blatant socialism that doesn't yield that much progress and really gives minimal benefit back to the American consumer.

But cutting spending food stamps in the wake of the worst economic crisis since the Great Recession is criminal. Especially when food stamps offer the best bang for your buck with the country's GDP. Especially considering the working poor -- a sizeable population among the impoverished -- rely on them. Especially when it's simply a compassionate program for a country that values all of its citizens enough to make sure they don't go hungry. But especially, yes, because our economy was destroyed by a handful of extremely wealthy con artists in the financial industry that put record numbers of people on food stamps in the first place. (Though I do support restricting what food stamps can be used to purchase.)

14. Banking on "The Daily Show." This is a depressing piece on American banking versus Canadian banking, highlighting something financial regulation reform supporters like myself have been saying for ages:



Obviously this is the Daily Show, so there's some editing going on here. But the basic facts speak for themselves. The Financial Industry is heavily regulated in Canada, which provides for ZERO financial bubbles bursting. However, it largely regulates itself in America, with bubbles bursting every decade or so.

There is absolutely no comparison, and it's an open-and-shut case in favor of heavy regulation of the financial industry.

15. Soda sin tax. We've had a huge debate on this before, but I continue to believe that we should apply a sin tax on soft drinks and now, energy drinks, the same way we apply a tax to cigarettes.

Experts are pouring in on singling out the role soda plays in obesity. But energy drinks really should be subject to sin taxes as well, since they can become a dangerous product for a sizeable portion of the population. At the very least, there should be cigarette-like prohibitions are marketing energy drinks to youth in some attempt to stem the tide from Monsters becoming the next Pepsi.

Last edited by Direckshun; 06-26-2013 at 12:54 AM..
Posts: 44,041
Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2013, 10:21 PM   #121
Direckshun Direckshun is offline
Black for Palestine
 
Direckshun's Avatar
 

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Springpatch
Casino cash: $5832
Read it. Very good piece.

I will say two things, however: varied uses of a term does not rob it of its meaning. For instance, when people say "Jamaal Charles LITERALLY faked that dude out of his jock," the word "literally" still has meaning whether or not people misuse it.

Secondly, my usage of the term "neoconservative" meshes with the theocratic, uber-hawkish, and economic libertarian political philosophy of the GOP since (at least) Reagan. My understanding is that this is the commonly accepted usage of the word throughout my young lifetime. If you think that I'm misusing the label please tell me what term you'd use.
__________________
Posts: 44,041
Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-28-2013, 01:34 AM   #122
Count Zarth Count Zarth is online now
JUST SAY NO
 
Count Zarth's Avatar
 

Join Date: Nov 2002
Casino cash: $9461
Quote:
Originally Posted by Direckshun View Post
I support all of our Presidents in my lifetime. I hope you have, too.
.
No. I think Obama is scum-sucking lowlife vermin.

Just because a man becomes President...doesn't mean I owe him shit.

Obama is a horrible person and a farce of a Prez.

I hate him more than I hate religious tyrants.
__________________
The Chiefs will finish 5-11, Alex Smith will play horribly, and Geno and I will cackle with glee while he burns Kansas City.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mavericks Ace View Post
I may be brain dead who knows.
Posts: 166,846
Count Zarth is obviously part of the inner Circle.Count Zarth is obviously part of the inner Circle.Count Zarth is obviously part of the inner Circle.Count Zarth is obviously part of the inner Circle.Count Zarth is obviously part of the inner Circle.Count Zarth is obviously part of the inner Circle.Count Zarth is obviously part of the inner Circle.Count Zarth is obviously part of the inner Circle.Count Zarth is obviously part of the inner Circle.Count Zarth is obviously part of the inner Circle.Count Zarth is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-28-2013, 01:54 AM   #123
J Diddy J Diddy is offline
One Groovy Cat
 
J Diddy's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: The Pitt State baby
Casino cash: $5295
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex Smith HATER View Post
No. I think Obama is scum-sucking lowlife vermin.

Just because a man becomes President...doesn't mean I owe him shit.

Obama is a horrible person and a farce of a Prez.

I hate him more than I hate religious tyrants.
I'm curious as to a reason before I run you through.
Posts: 29,337
J Diddy is obviously part of the inner Circle.J Diddy is obviously part of the inner Circle.J Diddy is obviously part of the inner Circle.J Diddy is obviously part of the inner Circle.J Diddy is obviously part of the inner Circle.J Diddy is obviously part of the inner Circle.J Diddy is obviously part of the inner Circle.J Diddy is obviously part of the inner Circle.J Diddy is obviously part of the inner Circle.J Diddy is obviously part of the inner Circle.J Diddy is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-28-2013, 12:07 PM   #124
HonestChieffan HonestChieffan is offline
Country Santa Year Around
 
HonestChieffan's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: In the Country in MO
Casino cash: $5795
Cool Stuff in the OP. And Beer gets really cold in a cooler filled with ice. I like that.
__________________
Frazod to KC Nitwit..."Hey, I saw a picture of some dumpy bitch with a horrible ****tarded giant back tattoo and couldn't help but think of you." Simple, Pure, Perfect. 7/31/2013

Dave Lane: "I have donated more money to people in my life as an atheist that most churches ever will."

Come home to Jesus Dave. Come home.
Posts: 28,403
HonestChieffan is obviously part of the inner Circle.HonestChieffan is obviously part of the inner Circle.HonestChieffan is obviously part of the inner Circle.HonestChieffan is obviously part of the inner Circle.HonestChieffan is obviously part of the inner Circle.HonestChieffan is obviously part of the inner Circle.HonestChieffan is obviously part of the inner Circle.HonestChieffan is obviously part of the inner Circle.HonestChieffan is obviously part of the inner Circle.HonestChieffan is obviously part of the inner Circle.HonestChieffan is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-28-2013, 12:30 PM   #125
patteeu patteeu is offline
The 23rd Pillar
 
patteeu's Avatar
 

Join Date: Sep 2002
Casino cash: $5000
Quote:
Originally Posted by Direckshun View Post
Because we're a democracy, and giving citizens the most information possible allows us to select the best government possible.

Any more softballs you want to lob my way? I know I've been out of the forum a while, so I appreciate the help.
I never thought I'd say that BucEyedPea needs to give one more lecture on the difference between our representative form of government and a democracy. I literally never thought I'd say that.

We need to rely on our elected representatives in Congress to make sure that the executive branch doesn't go too far in it's mission to provide for national security. It's good for the public to have the "most information reasonable" in balance with our national security interests, not the "most information possible".

Quote:
Originally Posted by Direckshun View Post
Yeah, I was told of the dire consequences we would surely face when Bradley Manning and Wikileaks shat all over the Pentagon. And........ well, turns out there was no "there" there. Just information, knowledge, and exposure of Pentagon bullshit.

The reality of it is, it was a strike of victory for transparency and accountability, and therefore democracy. The downsides are minimal, if they're there at all, and for all the rumored shit he could be exposing to the Chinese and/or Russian, there's basically zero evidence that any of it is actually real.
This is a demonstration of the same hubris that brings a Bradley Manning or an Edward Snowden to the point where they think they can decide what should be classified and what shouldn't. The truth is that none of the three of you know how these leaks might negatively harm our country. You can't know. You have very limited view of what these released secrets mean, how they relate to other information that you don't possess, or now that they've been released, what the consequences of those releases have been.

National defense secrets should be classified and declassified by people who are in a better position to judge the impacts of release than you or I are. Oversight to insure that we don't keep unnecessary secrets or improper reasons must come from Congress.
__________________


"I'll see you guys in New York." ISIS Caliph Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi to US military personnel upon his release from US custody at Camp Bucca in Iraq during Obama's first year in office.
Posts: 75,744
patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-28-2013, 12:34 PM   #126
patteeu patteeu is offline
The 23rd Pillar
 
patteeu's Avatar
 

Join Date: Sep 2002
Casino cash: $5000
Quote:
Originally Posted by Direckshun View Post
Aggressive domestic surveillance and imperialist foreign policy is the antithesis of libertarian. You might as well coin the phrase "liberal conservative."

I'll read the thread, though. Thanks for the heads up. I'll report back soon.
We're not talking about aggressive domestic surveillance here. We're talking about aggressive foreign intelligence surveillance.

I understand that there are libertarians who don't believe in national borders and who take a very pacifistic approach to international relations. But I don't think there's any reason to say that a person who has libertarian domestic views but who recognizes that the world outside our national borders is a dangerous place that will take advantage of someone who expects the people who inhabit it to follow the rules of libertarianism is the antithesis of a libertarian.
__________________


"I'll see you guys in New York." ISIS Caliph Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi to US military personnel upon his release from US custody at Camp Bucca in Iraq during Obama's first year in office.
Posts: 75,744
patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-28-2013, 01:08 PM   #127
patteeu patteeu is offline
The 23rd Pillar
 
patteeu's Avatar
 

Join Date: Sep 2002
Casino cash: $5000
Quote:
Originally Posted by Direckshun View Post
Read it. Very good piece.

I will say two things, however: varied uses of a term does not rob it of its meaning. For instance, when people say "Jamaal Charles LITERALLY faked that dude out of his jock," the word "literally" still has meaning whether or not people misuse it.

Secondly, my usage of the term "neoconservative" meshes with the theocratic, uber-hawkish, and economic libertarian political philosophy of the GOP since (at least) Reagan. My understanding is that this is the commonly accepted usage of the word throughout my young lifetime. If you think that I'm misusing the label please tell me what term you'd use.
1. There has never been anything "theocratic" associated with neoconservatism, as far as I'm aware. If you follow Beinart's evolution of the term, you get:

1970s - Belief in government intervention in the economy, but not government domination of it. Strong belief that the Cold War was worth fighting and that the US were the good guys.

1980s - The comfort with the welfare state was receding, and the Cold War hawkishness became dominant. By the end of the decade, neoconservatives were either hostile to the welfare state like other conservatives or they ignored it.

1990s - With the Cold War winding down, some of the older neoconservatives were comfortable with reducing our global military footprint. Others, the so-called second generation, started to envision a unipolar world in which the US would be the only super power for a long time to come. They favored a foreign policy designed around preventing potential rivals from rising.

2000s - Pretty much every Republican but Ron Paul in the early years of the decade. Later, it became anyone from any party who didn't agree with Ron Paul's neo-isolationism.

2. Hawkish almost seems fair, but there are other hawks and it's not mindless hawkishness. I'd say it's more of a willingness to use force in the pursuit of American interests than it is a bloodthirsty drive to go to war for the sake of war. Some have drawn distinctions between the neocons like Paul Wolfowitz who were willing to use force to spread democracy (because they believed that democracies would be in US interests) and national security conservatives like Dick Cheney who were willing to use force but who were more focused on pragmatically advancing US interests than on the democracy theory (and therefore might be willing to use force to prop up a friendly strongman, for example).

3. Like theocraticism, I don't think economic libertarianism has ever been a trademark of neoconservatism. Like I said earlier, at some point during the Reagan revolution, the economic coherence of the neoconservatives kind of disappeared. Before that, they were moderately liberal in their economic beliefs.
__________________


"I'll see you guys in New York." ISIS Caliph Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi to US military personnel upon his release from US custody at Camp Bucca in Iraq during Obama's first year in office.
Posts: 75,744
patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-28-2013, 11:06 PM   #128
Chocolate Hog Chocolate Hog is offline
Winner
 
Chocolate Hog's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: My house
Casino cash: $5560
Crossfire coming back to CNN hosted by Newt Gingrich. DIRECK CAME
Posts: 34,297
Chocolate Hog 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.Chocolate Hog 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.Chocolate Hog 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.Chocolate Hog 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.Chocolate Hog 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.Chocolate Hog 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.Chocolate Hog 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.Chocolate Hog 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.Chocolate Hog 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.Chocolate Hog 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.Chocolate Hog 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-29-2013, 10:50 AM   #129
BucEyedPea BucEyedPea is offline
BucPatriot
 
BucEyedPea's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: None of your business
Casino cash: $6560
Quote:
Originally Posted by Direckshun View Post
Read it. Very good piece.

I will say two things, however: varied uses of a term does not rob it of its meaning. For instance, when people say "Jamaal Charles LITERALLY faked that dude out of his jock," the word "literally" still has meaning whether or not people misuse it.

Secondly, my usage of the term "neoconservative" meshes with the theocratic, uber-hawkish, and economic libertarian political philosophy of the GOP since (at least) Reagan. My understanding is that this is the commonly accepted usage of the word throughout my young lifetime. If you think that I'm misusing the label please tell me what term you'd use.
NeoConservativism is not theocratic nor is it economic libertarianism. Besides the fact, that the GOP, as a group, practices a sort of mercantilism over laissez-faire since they are the descendants of Hamilton's Federalist/Whig branch. The original democrats were opposed to this branch but they were not democratic-socialists either. They're that today. Hence, their support of fake free-trade agreements such as NAFTA and GATT.
__________________
Posts: 57,156
BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2013, 11:34 PM   #130
Direckshun Direckshun is offline
Black for Palestine
 
Direckshun's Avatar
 

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Springpatch
Casino cash: $5832
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex Smith HATER View Post
No. I think Obama is scum-sucking lowlife vermin.

Just because a man becomes President...doesn't mean I owe him shit.

Obama is a horrible person and a farce of a Prez.

I hate him more than I hate religious tyrants.
This is pretty much Internet Tough Guy hogwash.

If you want the country to thrive, then you want the President to succeed.

If you don't want the President to succeed, then you don't want the country to thrive.

It's that simple.
__________________
Posts: 44,041
Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2013, 11:39 PM   #131
Direckshun Direckshun is offline
Black for Palestine
 
Direckshun's Avatar
 

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Springpatch
Casino cash: $5832
Quote:
Originally Posted by patteeu View Post
I never thought I'd say that BucEyedPea needs to give one more lecture on the difference between our representative form of government and a democracy. I literally never thought I'd say that.

We need to rely on our elected representatives in Congress to make sure that the executive branch doesn't go too far in it's mission to provide for national security. It's good for the public to have the "most information reasonable" in balance with our national security interests, not the "most information possible".
Voters need the most information possible. It allows them to have a better sense of what's going on in the government, and allows them to better accurately judge incumbents and challengers alike.

Any other idea that power should be top-down is anti-democratic, to be frank.

Quote:
Originally Posted by patteeu View Post
This is a demonstration of the same hubris that brings a Bradley Manning or an Edward Snowden to the point where they think they can decide what should be classified and what shouldn't. The truth is that none of the three of you know how these leaks might negatively harm our country. You can't know. You have very limited view of what these released secrets mean, how they relate to other information that you don't possess, or now that they've been released, what the consequences of those releases have been.

National defense secrets should be classified and declassified by people who are in a better position to judge the impacts of release than you or I are. Oversight to insure that we don't keep unnecessary secrets or improper reasons must come from Congress.
The problem is I'm not willing to constantly defer to the wisdom of those in power.

The idea of what shouldn't be public knowledge should be very, very slim.

One of the things you learn in Political Science 101 is that there is a constant tradeoff between freedom and security. To embrace one means a sacrifice in the other. The question, as always, should be risk vs. reward. And the abuses of allowing large factions of government activity to never see the light of day for miniscule reductions in terrorism casualties is heavily outweighed by the wisdom of almost universal sunlight on government activities which will make the government more accountable for its actions and less likely for abuse of government power to be tolerated by the voting public.

So, in a sense, you're right. Snowden, Manning, and myself should not be the determinants of what should and shouldn't be private. The American people should be. What Manning and Snowden exposed is that we are not only concealed of the truth (even perfunctory truth that should regularly be common knowledge, like the vast majority of both men's leaks), but that the American people are being actively mislead.
__________________
Posts: 44,041
Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2013, 11:47 PM   #132
Direckshun Direckshun is offline
Black for Palestine
 
Direckshun's Avatar
 

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Springpatch
Casino cash: $5832
Quote:
Originally Posted by patteeu View Post
We're not talking about aggressive domestic surveillance here. We're talking about aggressive foreign intelligence surveillance.
Nonsense. If you're accumulating terabytes of domestic phone metadata, you're talking about aggressive domestic surveillance.

But I digress.

Quote:
Originally Posted by patteeu View Post
I understand that there are libertarians who don't believe in national borders and who take a very pacifistic approach to international relations. But I don't think there's any reason to say that a person who has libertarian domestic views but who recognizes that the world outside our national borders is a dangerous place that will take advantage of someone who expects the people who inhabit it to follow the rules of libertarianism is the antithesis of a libertarian.
Libertarian = as minimal government functioning as possible.

Conservatives largely hew to this philosophy, but see legitimate exceptions in broadcasting American power internationally, and see value in select government responsibilities towards the general welfare, like entitlements.

Liberals believe in an actively engaged government that affirmatively provides greater justice and equality of opportunity, both domestically and abroad.

These are all broad strokes, but there it is.
__________________
Posts: 44,041
Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2013, 11:53 PM   #133
Direckshun Direckshun is offline
Black for Palestine
 
Direckshun's Avatar
 

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Springpatch
Casino cash: $5832
Quote:
Originally Posted by patteeu View Post
1. There has never been anything "theocratic" associated with neoconservatism, as far as I'm aware. If you follow Beinart's evolution of the term, you get:

1970s - Belief in government intervention in the economy, but not government domination of it. Strong belief that the Cold War was worth fighting and that the US were the good guys.

1980s - The comfort with the welfare state was receding, and the Cold War hawkishness became dominant. By the end of the decade, neoconservatives were either hostile to the welfare state like other conservatives or they ignored it.

1990s - With the Cold War winding down, some of the older neoconservatives were comfortable with reducing our global military footprint. Others, the so-called second generation, started to envision a unipolar world in which the US would be the only super power for a long time to come. They favored a foreign policy designed around preventing potential rivals from rising.

2000s - Pretty much every Republican but Ron Paul in the early years of the decade. Later, it became anyone from any party who didn't agree with Ron Paul's neo-isolationism.
I agree the term has evolved. This is all fair (except for the theocratic part, as there are definitive shades of Christianism in the Republican party).

But like I said, it doesn't rob the word of any and all agency, any more than me saying "patteeu LITERALLY has cement for brainz!" robs the word "literally" of its agency.

Quote:
Originally Posted by patteeu View Post
2. Hawkish almost seems fair, but there are other hawks and it's not mindless hawkishness. I'd say it's more of a willingness to use force in the pursuit of American interests than it is a bloodthirsty drive to go to war for the sake of war. Some have drawn distinctions between the neocons like Paul Wolfowitz who were willing to use force to spread democracy (because they believed that democracies would be in US interests) and national security conservatives like Dick Cheney who were willing to use force but who were more focused on pragmatically advancing US interests than on the democracy theory (and therefore might be willing to use force to prop up a friendly strongman, for example).
I don't recall saying, or implying, mindlessness in being hawkish. Perhaps a bit of a Freudian slip on your behalf...

Being hawkish is being hawkish. Like all things, there are smart ways of doing it, and dumb ways of doing it. The fact that the Republican Party has married itself to the dumb ways of doing it in the 21st century changes nothing as far as the term is concerned.

Quote:
Originally Posted by patteeu View Post
3. Like theocraticism, I don't think economic libertarianism has ever been a trademark of neoconservatism. Like I said earlier, at some point during the Reagan revolution, the economic coherence of the neoconservatives kind of disappeared. Before that, they were moderately liberal in their economic beliefs.
Fair point.

(Again, except for the theocraticism. Your continued willingness to turn a blind eye to the fundamentalist religion driving much of your party's agenda serves you poorly.)
__________________
Posts: 44,041
Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-2013, 12:04 AM   #134
Count Zarth Count Zarth is online now
JUST SAY NO
 
Count Zarth's Avatar
 

Join Date: Nov 2002
Casino cash: $9461
Quote:
Originally Posted by Direckshun View Post
If you want the country to thrive, then you want the President to succeed.
I disagree completely.

Obama succeeding in his goals would not be good for this country.

The rest is just bullshit, but he's truly an awful human being. The disrespect he has for the office he holds is disgusting.
__________________
The Chiefs will finish 5-11, Alex Smith will play horribly, and Geno and I will cackle with glee while he burns Kansas City.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mavericks Ace View Post
I may be brain dead who knows.
Posts: 166,846
Count Zarth is obviously part of the inner Circle.Count Zarth is obviously part of the inner Circle.Count Zarth is obviously part of the inner Circle.Count Zarth is obviously part of the inner Circle.Count Zarth is obviously part of the inner Circle.Count Zarth is obviously part of the inner Circle.Count Zarth is obviously part of the inner Circle.Count Zarth is obviously part of the inner Circle.Count Zarth is obviously part of the inner Circle.Count Zarth is obviously part of the inner Circle.Count Zarth is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-2013, 12:07 AM   #135
Chocolate Hog Chocolate Hog is offline
Winner
 
Chocolate Hog's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: My house
Casino cash: $5560
Quote:
Originally Posted by HonestChieffan View Post
Cool Stuff in the OP. And Beer gets really cold in a cooler filled with ice. I like that.
We know you don't like Chinese food
Posts: 34,297
Chocolate Hog 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.Chocolate Hog 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.Chocolate Hog 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.Chocolate Hog 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.Chocolate Hog 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.Chocolate Hog 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.Chocolate Hog 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.Chocolate Hog 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.Chocolate Hog 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.Chocolate Hog 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.Chocolate Hog 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.
  Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:14 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.