***Official Political Discussion Thread***

One thing I still don't get is HOW THE **** is Sessions allowed to be the one to interview the candidates for next FBI director who will take over the investigation he supposedly reused himself from(LOL)?!?!

Where are all the much hyped about 'checks and balances' that are supposed to uphold the rules?
 
Last edited:
Da multiverse paradox apparently has all da libbrohemians heads spinnin to infinity and beyond, baby.

POST OF DA YEAR B. LIBBIES and their Buzz Lightyear brains can't comprehend that Da negative universe is a worm hole that can only be reached with Da proper alignment of Da Coal Train, Da Hemi, Da rent control, Da passing VROOM power and LIBBIE TEARS B.
 
Negative dimensions? We in black holes now?

Asking for a libby friend


Tell Da Libbie friend to catch a ride on Da Cooooal Train and all will be revealed. I had to disavow all Da LIBBIE SNOWFLAKES in Da echo chamber of my life B. LIBBIES too busy crying Libbie tears in their Kale Smoothies to understand Da elite level moves Da Pencer and Da Don are making B. :smokin
 
One thing I still don't get is HOW THE **** is Sessions allowed to be the one to interview the candidates for next FBI director who will take over the investigation he supposedly reused himself from(LOL)?!?!

Where are all the much hyped about 'checks and balances' that are supposed to uphold the rules?

Grand Wizard Sessions making kla I mean Harry Potter moves B.
 
Because the FBI Director's job is more than just investigating Russian interference. Sessions' interview questions should not include anything about Russia to any of the candidates.
 
One thing I still don't get is HOW THE **** is Sessions allowed to be the one to interview the candidates for next FBI director who will take over the investigation he supposedly reused himself from(LOL)?!?!

Where are all the much hyped about 'checks and balances' that are supposed to uphold the rules?

The check is that the Senate has to confirm the pick.
 
Y'all heard about that massive cyber attack in 74 countries?

The damage is pretty minimal here. A few farmacists were targeted and our hospitals were targeted too but the WannaCrypt virus failed to get through their cyber security.
 
Last edited:
One thing I still don't get is HOW THE **** is Sessions allowed to be the one to interview the candidates for next FBI director who will take over the investigation he supposedly reused himself from(LOL)?!?!

Where are all the much hyped about 'checks and balances' that are supposed to uphold the rules?

The mistake the founders made was to believe that ALL their descendants and all Americans would always put themselves after the wellbeing of the nation.

Ataturk knew of the propensity of men to abuse power, which is why he gave the Turkish military the power to overthrow a corrupt government, but even that didn't save their democracy.

I guess checks and balances strong enough to overcome the greed of men just don't exist.
 
One thing I still don't get is HOW THE **** is Sessions allowed to be the one to interview the candidates for next FBI director who will take over the investigation he supposedly reused himself from(LOL)?!?!

Where are all the much hyped about 'checks and balances' that are supposed to uphold the rules?

The mistake the founders made was to believe that ALL their descendants and all Americans would always put themselves after the wellbeing of the nation.

Ataturk knew of the propensity of men to abuse power, which is why he gave the Turkish military the power to overthrow a corrupt government, but even that didn't save their democracy.

I guess checks and balances strong enough to overcome the greed of men just don't exist.

it is definitely hard to combat favoritism, nepotism & personal bias in politics but the framework has been pretty effective; in some ways it is almost too effective...
 
The mistake the founders made was to believe that ALL their descendants and all Americans would always put themselves after the wellbeing of the nation.

Ataturk knew of the propensity of men to abuse power, which is why he gave the Turkish military the power to overthrow a corrupt government, but even that didn't save their democracy.

I guess checks and balances strong enough to overcome the greed of men just don't exist.


Our Republic is faced with two major pressures. One is plutocracy. Highly concentrated wealth is inimical for a Republic that wants to govern for the general good and that wants to draw on a wide variety of voices. History has shown that Republics survive and reinvigorate themselves when they periodically redistribute wealth, forgive debts and take measures to increase wages. Traditionally, this was usually done with land redistribution as was the case in Ancient Greece and Rome and America in the 19th century. Without those distributions, Oligarchy grows and grows and your Republic will have a violent revolution or, much more likely, the oligarchy grows to the point that your society is a monarchy, in deed if not in name.

The other stressor is demographics and white supremacy. Conservatives have one guiding principle and it is the belief that wealthy, white men should rule. In the 1980's and the 1990's, they believed that a majority of the voting public was with them. In 2004, when Bush and other Republicans won a series of elections with 51% margins, conservatives talked as if we were living in 5th century Athens. They believed i na "unitary executive" and badmouthed constitutional protections for the minority Party.

Then 2008 happened and they saw that they were now the minority so they decided that they loved the Constitution and they took steps to retain power as a minority. With the election of Trump, they are becoming even more brazen in their attempts to hold power forever despite being a minority of the electorate. They want to establish an apartheid State and we have to stop them as soon as possible.
 


1000
 
Our Republic is faced with two major pressures. One is plutocracy. Highly concentrated wealth is inimical for a Republic that wants to govern for the general good and that wants to draw on a wide variety of voices. History has shown that Republics survive and reinvigorate themselves when they periodically redistribute wealth, forgive debts and take measures to increase wages. Traditionally, this was usually done with land redistribution as was the case in Ancient Greece and Rome and America in the 19th century. Without those distributions, Oligarchy grows and grows and your Republic will have a violent revolution or, much more likely, the oligarchy grows to the point that your society is a monarchy, in deed if not in name.

The other stressor is demographics and white supremacy. Conservatives have one guiding principle and it is the belief that wealthy, white men should rule. In the 1980's and the 1990's, they believed that a majority of the voting public was with them. In 2004, when Bush and other Republicans won a series of elections with 51% margins, conservatives talked as if we were living in 5th century Athens. They believed i na "unitary executive" and badmouthed constitutional protections for the minority Party.

Then 2008 happened and they saw that they were now the minority so they decided that they loved the Constitution and they took steps to retain power as a minority. With the election of Trump, they are becoming even more brazen in their attempts to hold power forever despite being a minority of the electorate. They want to establish an apartheid State and we have to stop them as soon as possible.
Would you include religious zealotry aka biblethumping and education in a list of threats to the US democracy? When you look at the current social climate compared to a few years ago. I'm not a US citizen of course but there seems to be a large increase of disbelief in science, statistics, ... or even pure disdain for (higher) education, science and facts. I believe biblethumping and education play the biggest role in that, with politicians' rhetoric fueling the flames.

The way things are looking now, I can only see that trend getting worse. 
 
Last edited:
there was plenty of anti-science sentiment in the past. there was all the creationism stuff, disinformation about aids, a greater intolerance against homosexuality (now it has shifted towards gender identity battles), etc.

also, the fraction of self-identified atheists is still low but is steadily growing.

that said, i do agree that there is a growing hostility towards science, and what is different now is that it is not just extreme church types that are behind it (some liberals are anti-vaxxers, pro-GI flush, etc). the internet has allowed disinformation to masquerade more easily as real news. throw in some shadowy elites who have an interest in the public being poorly-informed (like on issues such as climate change), and it is becoming a worsening problem.
 
Last edited:
Would you include religious zealotry aka biblethumping and education in a list of threats to the US democracy? When you look at the current social climate compared to a few years ago. I'm not a US citizen of course but there seems to be a large increase of disbelief in science, statistics, ... or even pure disdain for (higher) education, science and facts. I believe biblethumping and education play the biggest role in that, with politicians' rhetoric fueling the flames.
The way things are looking now, I can only see that trend getting worse. 


In my view, I would say that Evangelical Christianity creates some bad outcomes, policy wise, but that it is not an existential threat to democracy/self governance. Overall, American society is more secular than it ever has been and the minority of religious folks, who cannot accept this fact, make a lot of noise.

Also, the real energy for sexism and anti intellectualism, right now, is not coming from churches, it is coming from reddit and 4chan. It's the "South Park" Republicans who seems to really hate feminism and the American University. The guys who post Mike Rowe memes and who rant about trans people are often times the same folks who also post on militantly Atheist forums as well.

That is not to let Evangelicals off the hook but for now at least, they are happy to let the self appointed "alpha males," the Fedoras do their dirty work. Why spend time and effort banning the teaching of evolution when "dynamic, market based" approaches to public education will shut down public science classes in any case. Let the STEM-and-trade-school-only brigade shut down the liberal arts for you, there is no need for our religious zealots to attack America's intellectual life, they already have a bunch of 20 something keyboard objectivists to do all the heavy lifting.
 
Our Republic is faced with two major pressures. One is plutocracy. Highly concentrated wealth is inimical for a Republic that wants to govern for the general good and that wants to draw on a wide variety of voices. History has shown that Republics survive and reinvigorate themselves when they periodically redistribute wealth, forgive debts and take measures to increase wages. Traditionally, this was usually done with land redistribution as was the case in Ancient Greece and Rome and America in the 19th century. Without those distributions, Oligarchy grows and grows and your Republic will have a violent revolution or, much more likely, the oligarchy grows to the point that your society is a monarchy, in deed if not in name.


The other stressor is demographics and white supremacy. Conservatives have one guiding principle and it is the belief that wealthy, white men should rule. In the 1980's and the 1990's, they believed that a majority of the voting public was with them. In 2004, when Bush and other Republicans won a series of elections with 51% margins, conservatives talked as if we were living in 5th century Athens. They believed i na "unitary executive" and badmouthed constitutional protections for the minority Party.


Then 2008 happened and they saw that they were now the minority so they decided that they loved the Constitution and they took steps to retain power as a minority. With the election of Trump, they are becoming even more brazen in their attempts to hold power forever despite being a minority of the electorate. They want to establish an apartheid State and we have to stop them as soon as possible.
Would you include religious zealotry aka biblethumping and education in a list of threats to the US democracy? When you look at the current social climate compared to a few years ago. I'm not a US citizen of course but there seems to be a large increase of disbelief in science, statistics, ... or even pure disdain for (higher) education, science and facts. I believe biblethumping and education play the biggest role in that, with politicians' rhetoric fueling the flames.
The way things are looking now, I can only see that trend getting worse. 

I think this is a major issue in parts of Europe too. I'm Polish and the right, PiS, won because of their biblethumping. They have the older generation mesmerized. Funniest thing is that Poles are some of the biggest hypocrite when it comes to Catholic ideals. Sure they go to churches every Sunday but that's the extent of it.

Now I don't think Catholics are as extreme as American evangelicals, but the faithful are just as brainwashed. 16 years of catholic school (1-12 and then undergrad) has made me quite secular myself.
 
I think this is a major issue in parts of Europe too. I'm Polish and the right, PiS, won because of their biblethumping. They have the older generation mesmerized. Funniest thing is that Poles are some of the biggest hypocrite when it comes to Catholic ideals. Sure they go to churches every Sunday but that's the extent of it.

Now I don't think Catholics are as extreme as American evangelicals, but the faithful are just as brainwashed. 16 years of catholic school (1-12 and then undergrad) has made me quite secular myself.


In almost every society, religion can be genuine belief and also a cultural signifier (and for some people it is both but not many people). The genuine belief Christians, can be pretty liberal, at least in the broad sense of being empathetic and forgiving. It's the cultural signifier folks who are worrisome and in many cases they are using religion as cover for conservative, authoritarian impulses and as a way of signaling to the community "hey, I'm a citizen of good standing since, I am not the 'other.'"

Correct me if I am wrong, but Poland is having some issues with refugees from Syria and Iraq. So it would seem like invoking Catholicism would be a way of saying that they don't want outsiders coming into Poland. Given Poland's history where it has been attacked, at various times, by Muslims Ottomans, Protestant Swedes and Orthodox Russians, it would seem like Catholic symbolism would be short hand for "refugees, keep out."

Again, I do not know current Polish politics at all but I know how Greek and Armenians Orthodox Christians have used their faith as a short hand for political grievance against powerful outsiders.


As far as American Catholics are concerned, they are the biggest denomination but they do not crack 30% and having been minorities within a Protestant majority nation, they tend to be less Aggressive about pushing their beliefs, with the notable exception of abortion policy although even then it is, as you alluded to, evangelicals who are pushing hardest to restrict access to abortion.


Also, on that note. I would say that religious tolerance and pluralism is something that the United States is particularly good at. It is still very much imperfect but during most of our History, we have been exceptionally pluralistic and that one reason why this current anti Muslim sentiment is so shameful.
 
Marco Rubio is from Miami, the Miami Cubans don't like Cuba.

Speaking of Waterboy, he's voted in line with The Bigot[emoji]8482[/emoji] 100% since he took office.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/congress-trump-score/marco-rubio/

Reacho A. Smith told me that Rubio was a "moderate" though. :lol

What I'm trying to point out is exactly that. Miami Cubans fled the Castro government because they were dissenters, and Fidel cared more about loyalty than the rule of law, as is usually thee case in non-democratic regimes.

To have Rubio applaud the same type of move because "we're doing it and we'll benefit from it" is just rich, to say the least.
 
Back
Top Bottom