Trump announces Brett Kavanaugh as his 2nd SCOTUS nominee.

[kalm]

That’s a misdirection and you know it

If treep were making a pitch for decriminalization then I’d agree with him

But he is arguing that all incarcerated felons should be able to vote and that is not nearly the libertarian position that the criminalization of narcotics argument is. He mentions that most felons in prison are there for narcotics- fine... make the argument that THEY should be allowed.

I’m personally fine with felons who have served their time being allowed to vote. But from conviction to release they should not

CID is spot on but we're also missing that Trip argues that "the government should never be allowed to take away your liberty." So even if you have been convicted of first-degree murder, you shouldn't be incarcerated? You have taken away another person's life and liberty but yours shouldn't be taken away as a result? And on top of that, earlier in the thread Trip has argued that Kavanaugh should be impeached from the court because of accusations, not charges much less a conviction. That's fvcked up and I would like to hear his justification for the two positions.

I didn't say I agreed with everything Trip says or that I think murderers and those still fulfilling their sentences should be able to vote. But his point regarding drug crimes and liberty is solid. Hell, even you and Cid occasionally find a nut and I try to give you props at those times as well.

[JoltinJoe]

I guess the latest hit piece on Kavanaugh backfired even worse than could be anticipated.

Not only does it turn out that the offered victim says she can't remember being a victim of the described conduct -- but a little more digging uncovers that Leyland Kesyser -- Christine Blasey Ford's so-called witness -- has said that Ford's story "makes no sense"; that she does not remember ever being at the party Ford described; and that Ford's lawyers and backers pressured her to support Ford's story by threatening to reveal publicly her drug and alcohol dependency.

At this point, I have no doubt that Kavanaugh was falsely maligned and his family essentially assaulted emotionally by a bunch of thugs.

[89Hen]

And you're a morally-stunted and vindictive lawyer.

It might make you feel good to punish people who get convicted, but you basically say "you don’t deserve the right to vote about any issue which affects your family, your neighborhood, your future, or the planet.” But if you commit any number of crimes - serious or otherwise - and don’t get caught, well by all means you get to vote! So where do you draw the line? You don’t. Everyone gets to vote.

I’m not going to lose sleep if the rare mass murderer gets to vote, but the government should never be allowed to take away your liberty and take away your right to representation that allows you to challenge the laws that permit them to take your liberty.

ps. Most felonies are drug-related.

The line is pretty clear and distinct. If you don't wanna lose your voting privileges, don't be a convicted felon.

Wasn't trip the same guy who said it was easy to not be accused of a sexual crime... just don't do it?

[kalm]

I’m not emotionally attached to ideology and I don’t think you and IT are either. But trip is making a solid libertarian point here regarding liberty and the role government plays in incarcerating people for victimless crimes.

Victimless crime. WAFJ.

Yes.

[89Hen]

Isn't getting pulled over for drunk driving a victimless crime?

[UNI88]

Victimless crime. WAFJ.

Yes.

The libertarian in me says that drugs should be decriminalized but I'm not naive enough to think that all drug crimes are victimless. Simple marijuana possession? Yes. Dealing heroin or meth? Not so sure. Victims could include the addicts themselves, their friends & families, society (treatment, foster care, funeral services, etc.) and other victims if the user is engaging in other illegal activities such as robbery to support their habit. The victim doesn't have to be directly tied to the crime to be a victim.

[UNI88]

CID is spot on but we're also missing that Trip argues that "the government should never be allowed to take away your liberty." So even if you have been convicted of first-degree murder, you shouldn't be incarcerated? You have taken away another person's life and liberty but yours shouldn't be taken away as a result? And on top of that, earlier in the thread Trip has argued that Kavanaugh should be impeached from the court because of accusations, not charges much less a conviction. That's fvcked up and I would like to hear his justification for the two positions.

I didn't say I agreed with everything Trip says or that I think murderers and those still fulfilling their sentences should be able to vote. But his point regarding drug crimes and liberty is solid. Hell, even you and Cid occasionally find a nut and I try to give you props at those times as well.

No problems. You tend to focus on calling out the faulty reason and hypocrisy of Conks on this board while I tend to focus on the faulty reason and hypocrisy of the Donks.

I enjoy reading Trips posts but he does seem to think in absolutes and the world is a lot more gray than he is willing to admit.

[UNI88]

Nah, I don't believe in an impending apocalypse, civil war, or anything. Americans are too lazy for any of that (and conservatives in particular).

Personally, I think many here have ditched their values and completely drunk the conservative kool-aid. You casually brush off serious topics like they don't affect real people...as the debt/deficit grows, people continue to die from guns, people continue to die from a lack of proper healthcare (or go bankrupt getting it), Americans drown in student debt, homes have become near unattainable for young people, the government rolls back environmental protections, the military and prison industrial complexes grow, Unions are demonized, businesses have more voice than citizens, police shoot up black people with little consequence, Republicans turn a blind eye to Trump's kleptocracy, we've divested from securing our elections, and the rights of immigrants, minority groups, gay people, and women shrink.

And all for what? So the the wealth gap continues to widen while the will of the people gets ignored.

You don't give a sh*t about liberty or mankind; it's pure selfishness. Why do you think you've got an entire generation of Americans completely against what you stand for? Why do you think Republicans have a statistical issue with their long-term survival if they continue on this path? Is everyone who wants their government to work for them crazy too?

I'd be ashamed of my parents if they acted in any way like some of you do. You've completely sold the future of this nation for short-term gain. The worst is the hurt you're causing people.

Let’s take this post apart and talk about who cares about what:

- Debt/deficit – both parties are complicit and they’re hypocrites if they preach about it. A major draw of the Libertarian Party for me is fiscal responsibility.

- Gun deaths – yes, mass shootings are a tragedy and should be discussed and solutions tried, let’s start by enforcing the laws we have and focusing on (mental) healthcare. The elephant in the room when it comes to gun deaths is gang violence not lone wolf mass shooters. Why don’t Donks want to tackle that one first? It is a much more serious issue and it is probably hurting minority communities more.

- Healthcare – is a problem that Conks like to ignore or sweep under the rug and Donks. Donks are being dishonest with people about the who will bear the cost and the other impacts of a single payer plan. Both sides use it to rile up their bases but I don’t think either is interested in really resolving it.

- Student debt – the cost of an education ballooned when the federal government got so involved in student loans. You think more government involvement is going to fix the problem? Schools saw that there was a pile of money available and they took it and put it toward bigger administrative staffs and other things that did little to improve the quality of education they provided. Students made very poor decisions and took out bigger loans than they should have to pursue a degree. Question – if we forgive the debt of those that were fiscally irresponsible, what do we do for those that were fiscally responsible? Do we reward poor decision-making and essentially punish good decision-making?

- Homes & affordability – why are homes becoming less affordable? Living in Oregon I see tremendous efforts to increase affordable housing but I also see efforts to limit urban growth that actually limit housing options and drive up the costs. Both are worthwhile goals but Donks don’t want to admit that one is impacted by the other. Where is housing the most unaffordable? In major cities controlled by Donks? You can typically find affordable housing by lowering your expectations (size) or extending your search radius.

- Environmental protections – I believe in protecting the environment but it can’t be done in a vacuum. The Paris accords were sh!t. We could go to 0 carbon emissions and it would be a drop in the bucket compared to China and India and they’re not backing off. Let’s take a long-term view and focus on innovation rather than knee jerk attempts to demonize capitalism.

- Military and prison industrial complex – I agree that growth is a problem but I blame politicians from both parties more than the military. They like the jobs and campaign contributions these companies provide.

- Unions – are they being demonized any more by the right than the left demonizes capitalism? I personally think that having government employee unions who provide campaign funds and workers for the candidates who vote on their contracts is a conflict of interest that shouldn’t be acceptable. Unions are their own worst enemy. I know of a construction union in Chicago that tied the number of workers required to the size of the job. When technology advanced and the job could be done safely and effectively with fewer workers the union refused to change the contract. Then when non-union contractors started winning jobs, the union went to the contractors and complained that they needed to do something about the non-union contractors but they refused to change the contract.

- Police violence – are police really shooting up black people with little consequence? Yes, there are bad cops who do bad things but the vast majority of them are doing the best they can at a tough job. Make them the bad guy and many of them are going to say what the hell and the gang violence is going to get worse. If progressives continue to pursue this, it is going to blow up in their faces.

- Republicans turn a blind eye to Trump's kleptocracy – that's funny! Have you heard of the Clintons? Pot meet kettle.

- Immigrants, minority, gay, and women’s rights – are they really shrinking? Or is that hyperbole because of Trump and the animosity between small fringe groups from both sides . I like to observe human behavior and IMO things are better now than they were 20+ years ago and most importantly they continue to get better.

- Wealth gap continues to widen – I agree this is a problem.

- Liberty – neither party really gives 2 sh!ts about our personal liberties. Vote third party or get off your high horse.

We are advancing and improving as a nation but your hatred for Trump prevents you from seeing it. The system the founders created is working and it is protecting us from Trump’s worst impulses.

Hey Trip, still waiting for a response. Or are you just going to ignore it so you can continue blindly believing what you want to believe?

[JohnStOnge]

We could go to 0 carbon emissions and it would be a drop in the bucket compared to China and India and they’re not backing off.?

The United States is #2 in total carbon emissions to China. Here is one set of estimates:

https://www.visualcapitalist.com/all-th ... one-chart/

Yes we are #2 but about 1/7th of the bucket is a lot more than a drop.

I think there are arguments to be made with respect to the climate change issue. But I do not think the "The US reducing it's emissions wouldn't make any difference anyway" is not one of them. At least not a valid one.

[UNI88]

We could go to 0 carbon emissions and it would be a drop in the bucket compared to China and India and they’re not backing off.?

The United States is #2 in total carbon emissions to China. Here is one set of estimates:

https://www.visualcapitalist.com/all-th ... one-chart/

Yes we are #2 but about 1/7th of the bucket is a lot more than a drop.

I think there are arguments to be made with respect to the climate change issue. But I do not think the "The US reducing its emissions wouldn't make any difference anyway" is not one of them. At least not a valid one.

You're right John, it was a bit of hyperbole but you're missing the greater point. Could we get to O? Would that 1/7th drop be enough to make a difference? How are US carbon emissions trending over the last 10 years compared to China, India, Russia, etc.? Would they just fill in the 1/7th drop? And why does China get a pass? Are progressive really interested in combating climate change or is it another tool to be used to attack capitalism?

I'm not arguing against attempts to reduce carbon emissions, I'm arguing for innovation as the best means rather than attacking capitalism.

[CID1990]

The real question is -

If the rest of the industrial world isn’t on board, should we still make the necessary investments to reduce our own emissions to minimal levels?

Can our economy sustain that while we intentionally reduce our competitiveness (more than we already have)?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[kalm]

The United States is #2 in total carbon emissions to China. Here is one set of estimates:

https://www.visualcapitalist.com/all-th ... one-chart/

Yes we are #2 but about 1/7th of the bucket is a lot more than a drop.

I think there are arguments to be made with respect to the climate change issue. But I do not think the "The US reducing its emissions wouldn't make any difference anyway" is not one of them. At least not a valid one.

You're right John, it was a bit of hyperbole but you're missing the greater point. Could we get to O? Would that 1/7th drop be enough to make a difference? How are US carbon emissions trending over the last 10 years compared to China, India, Russia, etc.? Would they just fill in the 1/7th drop? And why does China get a pass? Are progressive really interested in combating climate change or is it another tool to be used to attack capitalism?

I'm not arguing against attempts to reduce carbon emissions, I'm arguing for innovation as the best means rather than attacking capitalism.

The free market doesn't care about the environment and it can lag behind human needs.

[UNI88]

You're right John, it was a bit of hyperbole but you're missing the greater point. Could we get to O? Would that 1/7th drop be enough to make a difference? How are US carbon emissions trending over the last 10 years compared to China, India, Russia, etc.? Would they just fill in the 1/7th drop? And why does China get a pass? Are progressive really interested in combating climate change or is it another tool to be used to attack capitalism?

I'm not arguing against attempts to reduce carbon emissions, I'm arguing for innovation as the best means rather than attacking capitalism.

The free market doesn't care about the environment and it can lag behind human needs.

What's better? A solution that's late or a costly and largely ineffective solution? What has the market accomplished in the last 50 years? What has government?

And CID boiled this down to the essential question.

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

[kalm]

The free market doesn't care about the environment and it can lag behind human needs.

What's better? A solution that's late or a costly and largely ineffective solution? What has the market accomplished in the last 50 years? What has government?

And CID boiled this down to the essential question.

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

I've used this example before, but the Spokane River was sterile and full of heavy metal contaminants from upstream mining in the Silver Valley. It was devoid of life. It is now thriving and full of bugs, fish, thanks to environmental regulation. The market didn't drive that. The market doesn't care about human life or needs. It follows the money.

I like capitalism, it's your capitalists I do not like.

[Ivytalk]

What's better? A solution that's late or a costly and largely ineffective solution? What has the market accomplished in the last 50 years? What has government?

And CID boiled this down to the essential question.

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

I've used this example before, but the Spokane River was sterile and full of heavy metal contaminants from upstream mining in the Silver Valley. It was devoid of life.

“Bereft of life, it rests in peace. ...It’s kicked the bucket, it’s shuffled off its mortal coil, run down the final curtain, and joined the bleedin’ choir invisible! THIS IS AN EX-RIVER!”

[UNI88]

What's better? A solution that's late or a costly and largely ineffective solution? What has the market accomplished in the last 50 years? What has government?

And CID boiled this down to the essential question.

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

I've used this example before, but the Spokane River was sterile and full of heavy metal contaminants from upstream mining in the Silver Valley. It was devoid of life. It is now thriving and full of bugs, fish, thanks to environmental regulation. The market didn't drive that. The market doesn't care about human life or needs. It follows the money.

I like capitalism, it's your capitalists I do not like.

I'm not against environmental regulation but I wonder if we're tilting at windmills with carbon limits.

And you're still avoiding the important question: how much of a difference would a concerted effort to reduce US carbon emissions really have? If we're at 17%, how much do we think we could realistically reduce them and will those reductions just be replaced by China, India, Russia, etc.? Reducing emissions and pollution in the US will be helpful but it will not solve the underlying problems. A band-aid isn't going to stop the bleeding.