Current or modern politics in the United States

[Tarkus666]

Originally Posted by SanteeFats

I don't think I am that right driven but I admit I am usually to the centrist of the right. There are some to the left policies I will support though.

Nothing wrong with policies of the right or the left as long as they make sense. Everything wrong with following doctrine because it is yours.

Originally Posted by SanteeFats

This site is not lucky, it is fairly free because of good moderation from Mal, Max, Estreeter, and scoundrel. I try to not remove posts from threads where I post in a lot unless they are so egregious that I feel I can do nothing else. As to blanket statements once in a great while they are appropos.

True not lucky. Just not big enough.

When people used to send in letters to the editor the newspaper tended to get maybe a dozen real letters, (hundreds from the wackos who sent letters every day), and the same went for television/radio media. Any time an editor got a complaint the model was that this one letter probably represented 5000 people so complaints were taken seriously, (you would be amazed at the number of commercials that were withdrawn from play merely due to two letters of complaints). Then comes the Internet and suddenly anyone can comment and not just once but repeatedly. Suddenly there is no basis to know what numbers means anymore.

When Instagram deleted millions of spam accounts it demonstrated that just lots of 'likes' doesn't mean anything. Rapper Ma$e deleted his account when he saw that 1.5 million of his fake accounts were deleted. What does that say about him and the process? Did he want to keep 1.5 million fake accounts?

Blanket statements are like our resident troll here who always has a standard comment; it is irrelevant. It is never apropos because there is no value in it.

Example:

SanteeFats: The shooting in Charlotte, NC suggests that the police shooting reports may be falsified.

Tarkus: 200 shootings in NC, black and white suspects, in the last 5 years and every incident was cleared as good shoot. Are we to believe that just this one shooting that was filmed was exception?

R***k: Abortion is murder!

[DTravel]

Originally Posted by Tarkus666

Okay you have gone a little off the mark here Comrade. But heck let's grab our hammer and sickle and go down this road.

If only you knew how funny it is for you to be saying that to me. Any rate, you missed my point. I wasn't referring to "mission statement" level threats to the public. I mean things like boards justifying not changing a design or recalling defective products because the cost/benefit calculation says that it will cost them less to settle the lawsuits from victims than it would recall and fix the item in question and it being a viable defense to say the executives would be sued for "failing in their fiscal responsibilities to the shareholders" if they did! Same with pumping/dumping/whatever toxic chemicals into the environment because the government fines are less than the lost profits from installing the proper filters and procedure to not do so.

[SanteeFats]

What is wrong with Harry Reid?? I guess he has just gone totally insane. At his age it is probably dementia maybe brought on by the "attack" from his exercise equipment. Ah well I hope he has a good rest home reserved. He is a major piece of feces at this stage of his life, IMO.

[hound dog]

Originally Posted by SanteeFats

What is wrong with Harry Reid??

You're a moderator Fats, maybe you could give some examples as to what it is that's upsetting you about Harry. Otherwise both are open to speculation...a knot in each others drawers, each of you dropped his ice cream cone and it landed cold side down?

[deepsepia]

Originally Posted by Tarkus666

Mark O'Mara, counsel for George Zimmerman, kind of summed it up when he said "everyone is certain about the need for a harsh legal response until they or one of their family finds themselves in the legal system. Then suddenly mitigating factors all become important and valid."

Its a curious thing. I notice a similar dynamic in support for gay rights-- the Republican party is hostile, except in families where someone somebody cares about is gay.

Here's a question no on ever asked Dick Cheney (but should have):
"Would you have supported rights for gay people, had your daughter not been gay?

-- and if, as is likely, the answer to that one is "no" -- "what is the basis for a moral argument that alters depending on whether or not your family member is affected?"

Originally Posted by Tarkus666

I figure this is a mix. The slaughterhouse owner is all about total freedom until the father of the child that died eating his tainted meat comes for retribution and then he wants the Government to protect him.

Yes, I'd add, the food producer who wants to provide a quality product is advantaged by strict regulation. Producers in Europe support very strict regulation. Its only the guy who "sells it cheap" who wants "anything goes"

[SanteeFats]

Originally Posted by hound dog

You're a moderator Fats, maybe you could give some examples as to what it is that's upsetting you about Harry. Otherwise both are open to speculation...a knot in each others drawers, each of you dropped his ice cream cone and it landed cold side down?

Don't know what being a mod has to do with it?
You are right though and I apologize for not being more specific about Reid.
His comments about Romney : http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...ys-tax-record/
Tea Party : homenews/senate/297353-reid-defends-remark-likening-tea-party-to-anarchists-
Dead Marines : http://newsbusters.org/blogs/mark-fi...ester-politics
R's all losers : http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...re-all-losers/

He just says anything, especially knowingly lying on the Senate floor where he is protected from libel suits, that will help his party. He does not care about anything but that. I don't think he cares a fig for what may be best for the country just the D's. Now I know pols on all sides will say a lot of misleading or insinuating comments to advance but out right lies just stick in my craw no matter who says them.
Hope this helps.

[SanteeFats]

Originally Posted by deepsepia

Its a curious thing. I notice a similar dynamic in support for gay rights-- the Republican party is hostile, except in families where someone somebody cares about is gay.
Here's a question no on ever asked Dick Cheney (but should have):
"Would you have supported rights for gay people, had your daughter not been gay?

I believe he would have stayed the course on yes because it would be politically correct. Also how can you know what your answer would be to a Q like that when you have the opposite in your own family??

[hound dog]

Originally Posted by SanteeFats

I don't think he cares a fig for what may be best for the country just the D's.

From the way I see it, He's playing the same game the Republican's have been playing for the last six plus years. Offering nothing constructive, trashing the other party at every opportunity, and obstructing what ever the other party is trying to pass. While I agree it does nothing to help the country, this example was set by the Republican leadership in President Obama's first term, and it should come as no surprise the Democrats are going to do the exact same thing now that the Republican's have the majority in both House's of Congress. Republican's are now reaping what they've sown.

I do find it amusing that after what seems like a hundred attempts to repeal the ACA, Republican's are rather mum on the subject of late. Ted Cruz has even enrolled his family. Could it be that it's actually working, and most people are happy with it, considering the alternative of no health care for them at all?

[hound dog]

Originally Posted by SanteeFats

I believe he would have stayed the course on yes because it would be politically correct.

Dick Cheney has never been politically correct a day in his life. If he didn't have the direct experience of having a Lesbian daughter, some one he obviously cares about and loves, he would be up in arms about how "immoral" it is.

[SanteeFats]

Originally Posted by hound dog

From the way I see it, He's playing the same game the Republican's have been playing for the last six plus years. Offering nothing constructive, trashing the other party at every opportunity, and obstructing what ever the other party is trying to pass. While I agree it does nothing to help the country, this example was set by the Republican leadership in President Obama's first term, and it should come as no surprise the Democrats are going to do the exact same thing now that the Republican's have the majority in both House's of Congress. Republican's are now reaping what they've sown.

I admit I don't know everything about this type of issue, so do you know of any other D or R or I who has deliberately lied about an opposing party member who is running for office on the Senate or House floor where they are libeled with impunity? That is what disgusts me about all this.