Party Over

Page 4 of 4 [ 61 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4

Previous topic | Next topic

GoonSquad
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 11 May 2007
Age: 56
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,748
Location: International House of Paincakes...

16 Jan 2016, 12:04 pm

Jacoby wrote:

There is not point having a bicameral legislature if they do exactly the same thing, a senator should not be a super-congressman. Repeal the 17th Amendment and then states would appoint senators, the senate represents the states and the house represents the people and having 7000+ reps shouldn't be a problem in a country of 330,000,000 million people. I believe there are many countries that have much larger legislative bodies than we have with far smaller population, they're not accountable to the people and too easily corrupt by the money and special interests. Permanently stuck on 435 makes zero sense. Add term limits and that moves the entrench garbage out pretty quickly, I think we'd be better off. We wouldn't have to worry about gerrymandering to nearly the same degree, there would be much more diversity in the opinion and much less manufactured consent.

Turn the Capitol into a museum and have our legislators can telecommute their votes. They should stay close to the people they represent not K-Street. DC is one of the richest booming metropolitan areas in the United States, why is that? Just send the bureaucrats home.

This is one of your less outlandish posts... I agree that we should go back to appointing Senators (with a 2 term limit). As for representative, I think we shoulld double or maybe triple the number, have term limits (3 2-year terms), and make districts as 'geographically compact' as possible to counteract gerrymandering.

_________________
No man is free who is not master of himself.~Epictetus

GoonSquad
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 11 May 2007
Age: 56
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,748
Location: International House of Paincakes...

16 Jan 2016, 12:13 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:

looniverse wrote:

Jacoby wrote:

0_equals_true wrote:

kraftiekortie wrote:

I don't really feel a party affiliation. I'm registered as an Independent.

I like some things from the Dems....others from the Elephants...others from others.

Why do you need to register as an independent? Just be one.

I have never quite got the party affiliation registering thing in the US. Why disclose that information, except to the party you support.

Some states have closed primaries and you have to register as a Republican or Democrat to vote in them, I'm sure there are other reasons for it too.

You can decline to answer but I just put independent.

It's pretty obvious by this election cycle already that the American people are deeply unsatisfied with their political parties. We have a Reality TV star/billionaire on one side and an old hippie that looks like Doc from Back To The Future as serious contenders.

I've lost faith in our system, I think we need to decentralize and have more direct democracy. Why shouldn't I be able to vote on policy matters that effect me? These representatives aren't uniquely qualified nor do they actually represent us, there is a huge huge disconnect now between the American people and their elected officials. Give us a slate of policy issues, require a civics test, let people vote on said issues, I doubt we'd come out worse.

Maybe the massive expansion of the House of Representatives + repeal of the 17th amendment would be a good alternative.

I like a few of your points. I think the Constitution was abused to create the centralized government that exists now. Thanks to the relentless progression of precedent, the 10th amendment is essentially meaningless.

I think we could revolutionize the system through technology. There is no need for a central hub with the ability for these representatives to telecommute. It would be very easy to go back to the original figure of one representative for every 40,000 people. Hoorah!

As for the decentralization, that's why I favor strict constitutionalists.

There wouldn't have been a need for centralization if all the states would have respected the rights of their citizens, regardless of race, sex, or sexual preference. But because the more reactionary states have had a bad record in that department, the federal government has had to step in to protect the liberty of all Americans.

That's not the only reason we needed a strong central government. Go back and study antebellum history. States went bankrupt trying to develop infrastructure (canals, etc.).

Without federal redistribution of wealth, the west would be a sparsely populated desert, the south would be a 3rd world hell hole, and the country, as a whole, would be a shadow of what it is today.

_________________
No man is free who is not master of himself.~Epictetus

Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,997
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

16 Jan 2016, 1:41 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:

Raptor wrote:

Kraichgauer wrote:

Raptor wrote:

Kraichgauer wrote:

Raptor wrote:

Kraichgauer wrote:

Raptor wrote:

Kraichgauer wrote:

Raptor wrote:

^ As opposed to what, not doing a goddamn thing about illegal immigration out of fear that it might come off as racist?

So... invading Mexico to stop illegal immigration is supposed to be a good idea? :roll:

Invade? No, but I see nothing that would preclude us from shooting anyone crossing over, or for that matter under, the US/Mexican border at any location other than established checkpoints. Nothing really protects them from such measures.

I thought we Americans were better than just shooting someone for just looking for opportunity.

With that mindset why not just call breaking and entering of our homes to be "just looking for opportunity"?
To me an illegal border crossing is breaking and entering.
Even if it were me, a US citizen, crossing back into the US illegally I'd expect to catch a bullet.

I think you know there's a huge difference between criminals who rob your home, and people wanting to work for a better future for themselves and their families.

Same principle: Illegal entry.

Quote:

And do children crossing illegally deserve a bullet?

They deserve two. One for the crime itself and the second one for thinking that by being children they can get away with it. Conservatives are nothing if not hard hearted and just plain evil.

Besides, the left's definition of children can be anyone with parents still living.
Any other questions?

I like to imagine this is just your attempt to piss me off in your role as a provocateur, and that you don't really believe any of that..

If I didnt know any better I'd think you were accusing me of being a T-R-O-L-L. :shameonyou:

1. Illegal entry is illegal entry.
2. You seem to not have much of an issue with federal agents shooting a 14 year old in the back in Idaho or burning kids do death in Texas so I don't see how you could have much of an issue shooting kids unlawfully crossing a border.
3. The left has been known to distort the term "child" to fluff up thier statistics on gun deaths. I imagine they do the same for thier other statistics if it suits them.

No provocateur-ing or trolling, just facts and some things I've observed...

The death of Weaver's kid, while regrettable, occurred during a firefight,

You must have missed the "shot in the back" part that there is forensic proof of, not to mention damages paid by the federal government.

Quote:

while the children burned to death at Waco were murdered by that fanatic David Koresh, after he figured he could jump start the apocalypse to get out of going to prison.

Depends on who's story you believe...

Quote:

What you're advocating is the shooting of people who are hardly violent criminals. Guess what, we Americans pride ourselves for being better than that.

We Americans have been shooting, shelling, and bombing people that do not fit the description of violent criminals since the colonial era. It's nothing new. Besides, once the practice of shooting people for illegal border crossings has been put into effect and carried out you'll see the tide of them begin to stem quickly.

_________________
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
- Thomas Jefferson

Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

16 Jan 2016, 4:40 pm

Raptor wrote:

Kraichgauer wrote:

Raptor wrote:

Kraichgauer wrote:

Raptor wrote:

Kraichgauer wrote:

Raptor wrote:

Kraichgauer wrote:

Raptor wrote:

Kraichgauer wrote:

Raptor wrote:

^ As opposed to what, not doing a goddamn thing about illegal immigration out of fear that it might come off as racist?

So... invading Mexico to stop illegal immigration is supposed to be a good idea? :roll:

I thought we Americans were better than just shooting someone for just looking for opportunity.

I think you know there's a huge difference between criminals who rob your home, and people wanting to work for a better future for themselves and their families.

Same principle: Illegal entry.

Quote:

And do children crossing illegally deserve a bullet?

I like to imagine this is just your attempt to piss me off in your role as a provocateur, and that you don't really believe any of that..

If I didnt know any better I'd think you were accusing me of being a T-R-O-L-L. :shameonyou:

The death of Weaver's kid, while regrettable, occurred during a firefight,

You must have missed the "shot in the back" part that there is forensic proof of, not to mention damages paid by the federal government.

Quote:

while the children burned to death at Waco were murdered by that fanatic David Koresh, after he figured he could jump start the apocalypse to get out of going to prison.

Depends on who's story you believe...

Quote:

What you're advocating is the shooting of people who are hardly violent criminals. Guess what, we Americans pride ourselves for being better than that.

People in gun fights are shot in the back all the time. Law enforcement isn't going to stop shooting just because one assailant suddenly turns to run after shooting at them. And as for the Weavers and Harris getting a cash payment for punitive damages from the feds - they had a sympathetic jury, is all.
Yeah, yeah, yeah, the government started the fire at Waco - I heard it all. If that was true, why did the federal agents outside try to save those Davidiots who ran out, only to try turning around to run back into the flames?
And sure, Americans have murdered people for less. That doesn't justify doing it though. My point is, we Americans, if we really hold to all the values we say we do, will repudiate that ugly past.

_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,997
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

16 Jan 2016, 10:16 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:

People in gun fights are shot in the back all the time. Law enforcement isn't going to stop shooting just because one assailant suddenly turns to run after shooting at them.

The legality of it is questionable. There is a lot of case history on the subject. Besides, I doubt you knowledge of firefight tactics is anything close to thoroth...

Quote:

And as for the Weavers and Harris getting a cash payment for punitive damages from the feds - they had a sympathetic jury, is all.

Jury my ass.
The surviving members of the Weaver family filed a wrongful death suit for $200 million. In an out-of-court settlement in August 1995, the federal government awarded Randy Weaver $100,000 and his three daughters $1 million each. The government did not admit any wrongdoing in the deaths of Sammy and Vicki.[65][66] On the condition of anonymity, a DOJ official told the Washington Post that he believed the Weavers probably would have won the full amount if the case had gone to trial.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruby_Ridge

Quote:

Yeah, yeah, yeah, the government started the fire at Waco - I heard it all. If that was true, why did the federal agents outside try to save those Davidiots who ran out, only to try turning around to run back into the flames?

Depends on whose story you want to go with. For someone who believes that all happiness and prosperity springs from government, well.....you know the rest.

Quote:

And sure, Americans have murdered people for less. That doesn't justify doing it though. My point is, we Americans, if we really hold to all the values we say we do, will repudiate that ugly past.

Not murder but just kill. There is a difference.

_________________
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
- Thomas Jefferson

Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

16 Jan 2016, 11:57 pm

Raptor wrote:

Kraichgauer wrote:

People in gun fights are shot in the back all the time. Law enforcement isn't going to stop shooting just because one assailant suddenly turns to run after shooting at them.

The legality of it is questionable. There is a lot of case history on the subject. Besides, I doubt you knowledge of firefight tactics is anything close to thoroth...

Quote:

And as for the Weavers and Harris getting a cash payment for punitive damages from the feds - they had a sympathetic jury, is all.

Quote:

Depends on whose story you want to go with. For someone who believes that all happiness and prosperity springs from government, well.....you know the rest.

Quote:

And sure, Americans have murdered people for less. That doesn't justify doing it though. My point is, we Americans, if we really hold to all the values we say we do, will repudiate that ugly past.

Not murder but just kill. There is a difference.

All you've demonstrated is that I was wrong about the Weavers and Harris getting their payoff by jury trial.
As for Waco - - what alternative story is there that has any facts supporting it?
And sure there's a difference between killing and murder. But shooting desperate, unarmed people committing a non-violent crime aint just killing

_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,997
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

17 Jan 2016, 12:14 am

Kraichgauer wrote:

Raptor wrote:

Kraichgauer wrote:

People in gun fights are shot in the back all the time. Law enforcement isn't going to stop shooting just because one assailant suddenly turns to run after shooting at them.

The legality of it is questionable. There is a lot of case history on the subject. Besides, I doubt you knowledge of firefight tactics is anything close to thoroth...

Quote:

And as for the Weavers and Harris getting a cash payment for punitive damages from the feds - they had a sympathetic jury, is all.

Quote:

Depends on whose story you want to go with. For someone who believes that all happiness and prosperity springs from government, well.....you know the rest.

Quote:

And sure, Americans have murdered people for less. That doesn't justify doing it though. My point is, we Americans, if we really hold to all the values we say we do, will repudiate that ugly past.

Not murder but just kill. There is a difference.

All you've demonstrated is that I was wrong about the Weavers and Harris getting their payoff by jury trial.

Oooh, that had to hurt. :twisted:

Quote:

As for Waco - - what alternative story is there that has any facts supporting it?

Who's facts?

Quote:

And sure there's a difference between killing and murder. But shooting desperate, unarmed people committing a non-violent crime aint just killing

Already addressed.

_________________
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
- Thomas Jefferson

Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

17 Jan 2016, 12:53 am

Raptor wrote:

Kraichgauer wrote:

Raptor wrote:

Kraichgauer wrote:

People in gun fights are shot in the back all the time. Law enforcement isn't going to stop shooting just because one assailant suddenly turns to run after shooting at them.

The legality of it is questionable. There is a lot of case history on the subject. Besides, I doubt you knowledge of firefight tactics is anything close to thoroth...

Quote:

And as for the Weavers and Harris getting a cash payment for punitive damages from the feds - they had a sympathetic jury, is all.

Quote:

Depends on whose story you want to go with. For someone who believes that all happiness and prosperity springs from government, well.....you know the rest.

Quote:

And sure, Americans have murdered people for less. That doesn't justify doing it though. My point is, we Americans, if we really hold to all the values we say we do, will repudiate that ugly past.

Not murder but just kill. There is a difference.

All you've demonstrated is that I was wrong about the Weavers and Harris getting their payoff by jury trial.

Oooh, that had to hurt. :twisted:

Quote:

As for Waco - - what alternative story is there that has any facts supporting it?

Who's facts?

Quote:

And sure there's a difference between killing and murder. But shooting desperate, unarmed people committing a non-violent crime aint just killing

Already addressed.

Just what facts are there that would dispute that insane fundies believed they could jump start the apocalypse, and started the fire? Or that the federal agents hadn't saved those Davidiots who tried to run back into the fire?
And I've admitted I've been wrong plenty of times. I think you're mistaking me for that guy in your mirror.

_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,997
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

17 Jan 2016, 1:45 pm

^
This isn't evidence but it suggests a strong possibility of foul play. It's not the only source, either. It's important to note that this was less than one year after Ruby Ridge which the feds had not fully been taken to task for. Meaning at that point the feds had no reason to be more careful than they had at Ruby Ridge.

It's also important to note tat the feds had opportunities to arrest Koresh off the compound since he went to town regularly. Raiding a compound suspected of being full of heavily armed fanatics when there were other alternatives says something.

Whatever, though. You have your beliefs and I have mine.

_________________
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
- Thomas Jefferson

Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

17 Jan 2016, 7:03 pm

Raptor wrote:

Yes, I agree that Koresh could have been arrested while he was shopping at the general store, or wherever he was going. I never said that the feds were infallible; in fact, everything quickly became FUBAR pretty quick. But I just don't believe the feds had set the place on fire, especially knowing that the Davidians were an apocalyptic cult, eagerly awaiting judgement day. In fact, they were no different than the People's Temple, or that UFO cult who thought they could transcend to Halley's comet by committing mass suicide. Like the other cults, the Davidians were just chewing on the bit with anticipation of ending it all in order to reach transfiguration. The feds ironically enough gave Koresh the excuse to light up the place.

_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

0_equals_true
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 5 Apr 2007
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,038
Location: London

18 Jan 2016, 6:16 pm

How did we get from a discussion about people choosing to identity as independent politically, to Branch Davidians?

Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

18 Jan 2016, 11:21 pm

0_equals_true wrote:

How did we get from a discussion about people choosing to identity as independent politically, to Branch Davidians?

That was me, I'm afraid. :oops:

I was telling the OP, who had the best view of what was happening there as he's a native Oregonian, that I also had the best vantage point about what was going on in Ruby Ridge, Idaho, as it's just practically across the state line. Well, Raptor had to jump on me, as he figures that because the feds had screwed up, Randy Weaver, fanatical, violent racist he is, couldn't possibly have created the whole situation in the first place. Well, needless to say, whenever Ruby Ridge is brought up, right wingers have to go to Waco, sometime or other.

_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,997
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

18 Jan 2016, 11:47 pm

0_equals_true wrote:

How did we get from a discussion about people choosing to identity as independent politically, to Branch Davidians?

You've been on this forum long enough to know the typical drift of these threads.
Not necessarily in this order:
Topic derailment
Strawman attacks
Trolling
Ad hominem attacks
Accusations of communism
Partisanship
Accusations of nazism
Red herrings
Accusations of racism
Butthurt
Accusations of sociopathy
Bullying
Accusations of insensitivity
More butthurt

Nothing new here...

_________________
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
- Thomas Jefferson

Page 4 of 4 [ 61 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4

Jump to:

Party Over Post Reply New Topic

Party Over