Page 4 of 5
#122
Quote by beadhangingOne
Shame no one listened to Eisenhower; he warned of the military-industrial complex a solid 50 years ago.


muhfugga had a lot of tings right ...

#DTWD
#123
I wonder how some of the old Republican presidents would view the modern Republican party.
#126
speaking of nixon, you know it's bad when his policies look liberal by today's standards. cooling tension with the USSR and arms reduction treaties, creating the environmental protection agency, at least saying he wanted some kind of universal health care, etc.
#DTWD
#127
Quote by magnus_maximus
Similarly, a civilised society owes its people protection from ignorance, squalor, want, sickness and idleness and the Government is the biggest part of the solution because of its power.
You were doing great until here. Your supposition the government should be paternalistic is ridiculous. Adults of good mental condition have every right to do stupid things; including engage in activities that cause them to display ignorance or become idle (if they become idle through personal choice, such as being a generally bad employee and eventually get fired).
Government should (and does) protect from sickness; government should (and does) protect from squalor and want that was not self-inflicted (such as gambling away all of one's money). Government should NOT protect people from choosing to be idle, neither should government protect people from their own ignorance. As I said before, the government should NOT be paternalistic.
#128
Quote by primusfan
speaking of nixon, you know it's bad when his policies look liberal by today's standards. cooling tension with the USSR and arms reduction treaties, creating the environmental protection agency, at least saying he wanted some kind of universal health care, etc.


Nixon was clearly an atheist muslim socialist communist nazi then.
#129
Eisenhower is my favorite president cuz he was a badass.
“Just to sum up: I would do various things very quickly.” - Donald Trump
#130
Legalize hemp...

or go off the cliff.
“Science cannot solve the ultimate mystery of nature. And that is because, in the last analysis, we ourselves are part of nature and therefore part of the mystery that we are trying to solve.”


-Max Planck

☮∞☯♥
#131
While I'm all for tax hikes for the rich, and I think we democrats should be ready to go off the cliff, I'd rather avoid it, and if that means simply making the rich pay more of their established rates that are currently being deducted so be it. If the republicans start being unreasonable we need to be ready to go off the cliff, the cliff would actually be really attractive if it weren't for the unemployment going up bit, but I'd rather avoid it by taking half-measures THAT THEN LEAD TO WHOLE MEASURES BY THE WAY. After we dodge the bullet, we need to start thinking long term.
#132
Quote by primusfan
Serious question: if we cut our defense budget in half, would our allies be forced to spend more on theirs? Or would it not affect them. I've always been under the impression that one of the reasons our allies have a lot of successful social programs is they have no need to finance a military since they know we've got their back. Or do you think in this day and age, they'd continue to just keep a really small, modestly funded military?

NATO would dissolve. Europe would plunge into another arms race. France would lose again.
Quote by SomeoneYouKnew
You should be careful what you say. Some asshole will probably sig it.

Quote by Axelfox
Yup, a girl went up to me in my fursuit one time.

Quote by Xiaoxi
I can fap to this. Keep going.
#135
Quote by magnus_maximus
I was making an obscure reference to the Beveridge report http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beveridge_Report.

Idleness refers to the fact the state should seek to help people find work, ignorance is about making sure that everyone is adequately educated.

I'm not saying government should be paternal. Well, maybe I am. The whole point of a sovereign state's power is that it protects its states from other sovereign entitities and looks after its citizenry, surely?

No, the whole point of a sovereign state is to protect its citizens' freedoms, not to "look after its citizenry". Protection of freedom can and should extend to things like adequate education in this era. It should NOT extend to things like helping people find work. One gains all the tools to find work in either secondary education or higher education.


It's just people are too ignorant to understand the political system and are sold lies and right-wing bullshit.

Yes, because there's never anyone who ends up being sold left-wing bullshit. Both sides of the political spectrum are equally guilty of using talking points, lies, etc. Stop acting like one side of the aisle is inherently good, and the other is evil. That just makes you sound like you're ignorant.

However, I will give that most people are too ignorant about the political system. Thing is, they have every right to be that ignorant. If they choose to NOT do some basic research on all the candidates (something I do every election, btw; I follow politics in my state of Wisconsin and on the US national level very closely)...then it's NOT up to the government to "correct" their ignorance. People have every right to ignorant on any number of subjects, including politics.
#136
Quote by crazysam23_Atax
Yes, because there's never anyone who ends up being sold left-wing bullshit. Both sides of the political spectrum are equally guilty of using talking points, lies, etc. Stop acting like one side of the aisle is inherently good, and the other is evil. That just makes you sound like you're ignorant.

One side is way more guilty tho.
#137
Quote by magnus_maximus
The difference is people are almost always sold right wingism under the guise of "freedom" when in fact the left wing and freedom are anything but mutually exclusive- except the left wing includes freedom from want, disease and squalor.

And bolded is just plain wrong. Are you saying that everyone who is unemployed is just a failure of education?

Underlined - that's nowhere near true. What about monarchies? Dictatorships
?

Nobody has the right to be ignorant, because they become a burden not only on themselves but on others. Ignorance and idiocy are the inertia that holds back society.



I mean, the stated goal of primary and secondary education is to prepare you with the tools for success in a profession...

And, remember, government protects those 'freedoms' that it defines. Monarchies and Dictatorships simply don't define freedoms. Freedom is Slavery.
#138
Quote by magnus_maximus
Western Europe will never descend into war again. We've learned as a continent.

One word answer to that one man.
Bullshit.
I know it's a compound word but it's still one word.
Quote by SomeoneYouKnew
You should be careful what you say. Some asshole will probably sig it.

Quote by Axelfox
Yup, a girl went up to me in my fursuit one time.

Quote by Xiaoxi
I can fap to this. Keep going.
#139
Quote by crazysam23_Atax

Yes, because there's never anyone who ends up being sold left-wing bullshit. Both sides of the political spectrum are equally guilty of using talking points, lies, etc.

The right wing is worse. Way worse. They're a well-oiled bullshit-churning machine.
Quote by EpiExplorer
I swear this guy in particular writes for the telegraph or some shit.

Quote by Fat Lard
My name can actually be traced back to as early as the 1990s, it means "fuck off data miner"
#140
War is always self destructive.
Quote by SomeoneYouKnew
You should be careful what you say. Some asshole will probably sig it.

Quote by Axelfox
Yup, a girl went up to me in my fursuit one time.

Quote by Xiaoxi
I can fap to this. Keep going.
#141
Quote by magnus_maximus
The difference is people are almost always sold right wingism under the guise of "freedom" when in fact the left wing and freedom are anything but mutually exclusive- except the left wing includes freedom from want, disease and squalor.

Prove it.

I've stated that neither side is better than the other, which is true. Things won't magically get better if "your guys" are able to get things done.

Quote by magnus_maximus
And bolded is just plain wrong. Are you saying that everyone who is unemployed is just a failure of education?
Nope, but I am saying it's not the job of the government to make sure you get a job.

Nobody has the right to be ignorant, because they become a burden not only on themselves but on others. Ignorance and idiocy are the inertia that holds back society.
How do they become a burden to other by being ignorant or idiotic? If they're too ignorant or idiotic to keep up with things, society will simply leave them behind.
History is filled with heaps of ignorant and idiotic people. Some of them are even mostly famous for such bad qualities. (Look up bad leaders in history. For example, Louis XVI's ignorance and idiocy on the true state of France during his reign cost him his royal head.)

Quote by magnus_maximus
Underlined - that's nowhere near true. What about monarchies? Dictatorships?

That's the problem with authoritarian governments -- they decide whether you get to have certain freedoms. That's why most developed societies (and many developing societies as well) have opted for representative forms of government. Such representative governments protect freedoms for ALL, rather than deciding whether Guy1/Girl1 gets them and Guy2/Girl2 doesn't.

Quote by ErikLensherr
The right wing is worse. Way worse. They're a well-oiled bullshit-churning machine.

Does it really matter who is worse? I imagine several years down the line, politics will shift slightly and the other side will become a "well-oiled, bullshit-churning machine".
Last edited by crazysam23_Atax at Nov 12, 2012,
#142
Quote by crazysam23_Atax
Does it really matter who is worse? I imagine several years down the line, politics will shift slightly and the other side will become a "well-oiled, bullshit-churning machine".


Of course it matters. If one side lies a lot more than the other, they should be called on it, not let off the hook with lazy false equivalencies about how "they're both equally to blame." That's a lie right there, Sam.
Quote by EpiExplorer
I swear this guy in particular writes for the telegraph or some shit.

Quote by Fat Lard
My name can actually be traced back to as early as the 1990s, it means "fuck off data miner"
#143
Quote by ErikLensherr
Of course it matters. If one side lies a lot more than the other, they should be called on it, not let off the hook with lazy false equivalencies about how "they're both equally to blame." That's a lie right there, Sam.

1) I never said they were both equally to blame. I said they have both lied, used talking points, etc. (The language I used was meant to be quite specific, except for the "etc." part because I couldn't think of anything else. )
2) You're missing my overall point about that. I trying to say that, over the course of the last 60 years, I'm sure that both the left and the right have engaged in equally heinous acts. In fact, I'd be willing to bet that, if a neutral organization (such as maybe a foreign, non-partisan group) checked whether the Left or the Right lied more, it'd probably equalize out over the last 60 years. Maybe the UK Right-wing has lied more in recent years, but the UK Left-wing is equally guilty for its current and past lies.
Acting like one side is clearly better than the other because the Left-wing has lied as much in recent years as the Right-wing has...well, that's just a rather small-picture view. Look at the big picture.
#144
Quote by crazysam23_Atax
1) I never said they were both equally to blame. I said they have both lied, used talking points, etc. (The language I used was meant to be quite specific, except for the "etc." part because I couldn't think of anything else. )
2) You're missing my overall point about that. I trying to say that, over the course of the last 60 years, I'm sure that both the left and the right have engaged in equally heinous acts. In fact, I'd be willing to bet that, if a neutral organization (such as maybe a foreign, non-partisan group) checked whether the Left or the Right lied more, it'd probably equalize out over the last 60 years. Maybe the UK Right-wing has lied more in recent years, but the UK Left-wing is equally guilty for its current and past lies.
Acting like one side is clearly better than the other because the Left-wing has lied as much in recent years as the Right-wing has...well, that's just a rather small-picture view. Look at the big picture.


I see your logical argument...


... And I raise you one Elmo.


#145
Quote by crazysam23_Atax
1) I never said they were both equally to blame. I said they have both lied, used talking points, etc. (The language I used was meant to be quite specific, except for the "etc." part because I couldn't think of anything else. )
2) You're missing my overall point about that. I trying to say that, over the course of the last 60 years, I'm sure that both the left and the right have engaged in equally heinous acts. In fact, I'd be willing to bet that, if a neutral organization (such as maybe a foreign, non-partisan group) checked whether the Left or the Right lied more, it'd probably equalize out over the last 60 years. Maybe the UK Right-wing has lied more in recent years, but the UK Left-wing is equally guilty for its current and past lies.
Acting like one side is clearly better than the other because the Left-wing has lied as much in recent years as the Right-wing has...well, that's just a rather small-picture view. Look at the big picture.

But why? Why do you assume it magically has to balance out and why is it so inconceivable that one is just objectively worse than the other?

Forget about the past 60 years and just focus on Romney vs. Obama. There are nonpartisan fact-checking organizations that take accounts of this stuff and Romney ran a much more dishonest campaign than Obama: http://www.eclectablog.com/2012/10/politifact-tells-the-tale-obamabiden-lead-in-truth-department-romneyryan-tell-more-lies-chart.html
Quote by EpiExplorer
I swear this guy in particular writes for the telegraph or some shit.

Quote by Fat Lard
My name can actually be traced back to as early as the 1990s, it means "fuck off data miner"
#146
sam is always pulling this "everyone sucks equally!" crap. like come on sam, you're starting to sound like a communist.
#147
Quote by ErikLensherr
Forget about the past 60 years and just focus on Romney vs. Obama. There are nonpartisan fact-checking organizations that take accounts of this stuff and Romney ran a much more dishonest campaign than Obama: http://www.eclectablog.com/2012/10/politifact-tells-the-tale-obamabiden-lead-in-truth-department-romneyryan-tell-more-lies-chart.html

And there's things that Obama said he would do as President and never did. What's your point? Btw, I found both Obama AND Romney to be terrible candidates. (And no, I'm not a Ron Paul-er or anything else.)

Quote by Eastwinn
sam is always pulling this "everyone sucks equally!" crap. like come on sam, you're starting to sound like a communist.



I also end up pulling the "goverment should NOT paternalistic" crap, which is definitely NOT Communist.

Call me a follower of the Lockian school of political thought, albeit one with a rather pessimistic attitude towards 20th century/21st century government.
Last edited by crazysam23_Atax at Nov 12, 2012,
#148
Quote by crazysam23_Atax
And there's things that Obama said he would do as President and never did. What's your point? Btw, I found both Obama AND Romney to be terrible candidates. (And no, I'm not a Ron Paul-er or anything else.)




I also end up pulling the "goverment should NOT paternalistic" crap, which is definitely NOT Communist.

Call me a follower of the Lockian school of political thought, albeit one with a rather pessimistic attitude towards 20th century/21st century government.



Naw how about we take everyone outside, give them guns, and solve elections the Hobbes way?
#149
Quote by crazysam23_Atax
And there's things that Obama said he would do as President and never did. What's your point? Btw, I found both Obama AND Romney to be terrible candidates. (And no, I'm not a Ron Paul-er or anything else.)


You don't have to support or like Obama to acknowledge that Romney was a worse liar.

Same as you don't have to like John Kerry to acknowledge the "Swift Boats" ads were bullshit.

Or approve of Obamacare to acknowledge "death panels" are bullshit.

Or support the Sandinistas to acknowledge that basically everything Reagan said about Iran-Contra was bullshit.

And so on and so forth.
Quote by EpiExplorer
I swear this guy in particular writes for the telegraph or some shit.

Quote by Fat Lard
My name can actually be traced back to as early as the 1990s, it means "fuck off data miner"
#150
Quote by ErikLensherr
You don't have to support or like Obama to acknowledge that Romney was a worse liar.

Same as you don't have to like John Kerry to acknowledge the "Swift Boats" ads were bullshit.

Or approve of Obamacare to acknowledge "death panels" are bullshit.

Or support the Sandinistas to acknowledge that basically everything Reagan said about Iran-Contra was bullshit.

And so on and so forth.

You're supposing I supported Bush or Romney. I didn't. I found Bush to be rather ineffectual, and all Romney did was say, "I'm NOT Obama, but I should be the President. My policies are exactly the opposite of his". That doesn't change the fact that I still think Obama has lied about several things over the course of his presidency.

Also, if you paid close attention to the American political race (not just read a story or two on it), you'd see that both Romney and Obama were engaged in lying. That's why I found both candidates to be deplorable. I really don't want a man in office who basically twists things to make his way look like it's the best way. Unfortunately, there's WAY TOO MANY politicians who do this today, no matter their political affiliation. Politics today is a huge lie-fest, and that doesn't change just because of the side of the Political Spectrum varies from politician to politician.

Quote by L2112Lif
Naw how about we take everyone outside, give them guns, and solve elections the Hobbes way?



"Nasty, brutal, & short", huh?
Last edited by crazysam23_Atax at Nov 12, 2012,
#151
Quote by crazysam23_Atax
You're supposing I supported Bush or Romney. I didn't. I found Bush to be rather ineffectual, and all Romney did was say, "I'm NOT Obama, but I should be the President. My policies are exactly the opposite of his". That doesn't change the fact that I still think Obama has lied about several things over the course of his presidency.




"Nasty, brutal, & short", huh?



It's only the most efficient way.
#152
Quote by crazysam23_Atax
You're supposing I supported Bush or Romney. I didn't. I found Bush to be rather ineffectual, and all Romney did was say, "I'm NOT Obama, but I should be the President. My policies are exactly the opposite of his". That doesn't change the fact that I still think Obama has lied about several things over the course of his presidency.

I absolutely am not, lol. It doesn't matter what affiliation you are, anyone can tell the difference between facts and lies.

I support Obama and acknowledge he hasn't been completely honest. But Romney is more dishonest.
Quote by EpiExplorer
I swear this guy in particular writes for the telegraph or some shit.

Quote by Fat Lard
My name can actually be traced back to as early as the 1990s, it means "fuck off data miner"
#153
Quote by L2112Lif
It's only the most efficient way.

*strokes beard* Hmm...you may be on to something there...




Why does searching for "Kermit the Frog" pull up an image with an old guy clutching his chest?

Quote by ErikLensherr
I support Obama and acknowledge he hasn't been completely honest. But Romney is more dishonest.

Not really.


But you're welcome to your biased opinion on the matter. I'll take mine and go over here. *toddles off to a more comfortable chair*

Edit:
Quote by Jackal58
War is always self destructive.

To end my contribution to this thread...

http://youtu.be/01-2pNCZiNk

Might as well go out with damn good music playing as you exit, right?
Last edited by crazysam23_Atax at Nov 12, 2012,
#155
Quote by crazysam23_Atax
Not really.


But you're welcome to your biased opinion on the matter. I'll take mine and go over here. *toddles off to a more comfortable chair*

Quote by EpiExplorer
I swear this guy in particular writes for the telegraph or some shit.

Quote by Fat Lard
My name can actually be traced back to as early as the 1990s, it means "fuck off data miner"
#156
Quote by bradulator
Eisenhower is my favorite president cuz he was a badass.


i see your eisenhower and raise you a theodore roosevelt.

#DTWD
#157
Quote by crazysam23_Atax
You're supposing I supported Bush or Romney. I didn't.

Actually he presented his case in a way that doesn't hinge on you being for one or against the other. It's just facts, cold uncaring facts.
Quote by crazysam23_Atax
I found Bush to be rather ineffectual, and all Romney did was say, "I'm NOT Obama, but I should be the President. My policies are exactly the opposite of his". That doesn't change the fact that I still think Obama has lied about several things over the course of his presidency.

Not related but funnily enough the last debate Romney seemed to say his policies were pretty much the same, but somehow Obama's were worse
Quote by crazysam23_Atax
Also, if you paid close attention to the American political race (not just read a story or two on it), you'd see that both Romney and Obama were engaged in lying.

Actually Eric just posted a link to a site that showed that both of them lied, he isn't claiming one is always telling the truth. His case is that one side objectively is lying more than the other.

If Timmy has 42 apples and John has 12, Timmy objectively has more apples than John. It doesn't matter that John also has apples when you say that, as long as they are fewer than Timmy's your statement is true.
Quote by crazysam23_Atax
That's why I found both candidates to be deplorable. I really don't want a man in office who basically twists things to make his way look like it's the best way.

That is every politician ever.
Quote by crazysam23_Atax
Unfortunately, there's WAY TOO MANY politicians who do this today, no matter their political affiliation. Politics today is a huge lie-fest, and that doesn't change just because of the side of the Political Spectrum varies from politician to politician.

The problem is that you seem to always want to equate the two sides, as if John takes up the same amount of space with his apples as Timmy does in our collective basket. Both sides lie, that is true. But one side is objectively lying more at a scale that is just ridiculous.

You don't have to support Democrats/Obama/liberalism or really any side for that matter to see that.
In my heart I'm with you

every night
#158
Quote by crazysam23_Atax
1) I never said they were both equally to blame. I said they have both lied, used talking points, etc. (The language I used was meant to be quite specific, except for the "etc." part because I couldn't think of anything else. )
2) You're missing my overall point about that. I trying to say that, over the course of the last 60 years, I'm sure that both the left and the right have engaged in equally heinous acts. In fact, I'd be willing to bet that, if a neutral organization (such as maybe a foreign, non-partisan group) checked whether the Left or the Right lied more, it'd probably equalize out over the last 60 years. Maybe the UK Right-wing has lied more in recent years, but the UK Left-wing is equally guilty for its current and past lies.
Acting like one side is clearly better than the other because the Left-wing has lied as much in recent years as the Right-wing has...well, that's just a rather small-picture view. Look at the big picture.

If you had a foreign, non-partisan group examine our politics, there would be no "left." Only a right and a further right.
#159
Quote by crazysam23_Atax

Nope, but I am saying it's not the job of the government to make sure you get a job.


Herbert Hoover thought the same thing. That turned out wonderfully!

Anyway, the gov need not ensure the outcome of employment, but they do need to at least make sure the opportunity is there for qualified candidates. That is to say, policy should allow for social mobility and merit-based advancement. The way society is structured in the US as of now, accident of birth seems to be a greater determinant of future success than hard work.

And the US right wing (neoconservatives, GOP) is definitely worse than the US 'left-wing' (aka moderately Republican). They both suck, but it's painfully obvious which one is shittier and which one any sane person would rather deal with.
#160
Quote by magnus_maximus
Did you know - cows are statistically more likely to kill you than sharks?


it doesn't matter magnus, they're both equally dangerous.