Post Aa0FDlFMDziFW48mhM by freemo@qoto.org
(DIR) More posts by freemo@qoto.org
(DIR) Post #AZy2MIK1eAjPmC4s3E by georgetakei@universeodon.com
2023-09-20T18:53:53Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
The GOP-led House is in disarray and focused on all the wrong things. They couldn’t even get a bill to fund the Pentagon through a procedural vote because five of their far-right members revolted. And now Speaker McCarthy has pulled the continuing resolution to fund the government, one that was hammered out by the different factions this weekend, from any consideration because it also doesn’t have the votes.Instead of doing their job and passing a budget—one they already agreed to earlier this year—they are preceding with an impeachment inquiry into President Biden because the Orange Guy insists he shouldn’t be the only impeached candidate up on stage. The hearing will now happen just two days before the government shuts down because they don’t have a budget in place.This is the GOP in a nutshell, folks. Paralysis, political theatrics, and chaos.
(DIR) Post #AZy2MJ9mXk8EMiICiu by freemo@qoto.org
2023-09-20T18:55:21Z
1 likes, 1 repeats
@georgetakei I have no love for the GOP my friend, but you are criticizing them for doing the one thing the democrats arent doing and should.... Vote their conscious rather than just agreeing with the group.We **want** politicians who are there to vote whats right, not what their party tells them to vote.
(DIR) Post #AZy2ZkAzOf3FvgGQkq by tripu@qoto.org
2023-09-20T18:57:50Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@freemo @georgetakeiHear, hear
(DIR) Post #AZy2wrm5JRBi9hdn1c by klawansky@sfba.social
2023-09-20T19:02:00Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@freemo what kind of conscience do you think “these” people have?
(DIR) Post #AZy3EPwJXbqD2UnK1Q by freemo@qoto.org
2023-09-20T19:05:09Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@klawansky To whom do you mean? The left? The right?I dont expect either side to have a conscious from what I've seen.More importantly, why are you twisting my words? Anyone who read what i said clearly could figure out I wasnt saying they have a good conscious, only that they followed what they felt was right rather than what the group told them to do.
(DIR) Post #AZy5m3mgcVgC51SdzE by pyranose@fosstodon.org
2023-09-20T19:33:39Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@freemo @georgetakei Lots of politicians did what they thought was right in the 1930s. Turns out xenophobic, racist fascists have different opinions of what that is than most folks. Also, no American has seen « the left » since the 1970s, center-right democrats don’t count.
(DIR) Post #AZy5ugE7ZkuzckP5t2 by wren@universeodon.com
2023-09-20T19:04:42Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@klawansky @freemo I was about to ask the same thing but you ask with more restraint than I was able to muster.
(DIR) Post #AZy5uhAc4HhqY9lo3c by freemo@qoto.org
2023-09-20T19:35:11Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@wren Why would you have to restrain yourself? Are you suggesting you would feel the need to attack someone who hates the GOP like you but had a criticism of how the DNC could improve in some way and isnt perfect.Hmm... that is troubling if thats the case.@klawansky
(DIR) Post #AZy6GKLHce2Y7a4lMm by freemo@qoto.org
2023-09-20T19:39:07Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@pyranose Can you list what policies of Biden or Obama's that either of them took action to execute in some way, that is a right-leaning policy stance?As far as I know every single one of their policy stances and actions have been left side of the fence:* increased restrictions on guns* push towards universal single payer healthcare* pro-abortion* pro equal oppertunity* pro free education/loan forgivness.Literally cant think of a single thing they pushed for that is right.And yes, obviously we want people to follow their conscious and be a good person... funny that huh, its almost like having a conscious is important, but so are other things.@georgetakei
(DIR) Post #AZy6oddEPXDtnBpd8y by pyranose@fosstodon.org
2023-09-20T19:45:20Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@freemo @georgetakei Funny what you think is left are all basic human rights in my country. I’ll give you some real left actions:Increase corporate taxes to a sustainable level for the betterment of society. Increase taxes on the rich to post war levels. Close all corporate tax loopholes. Nationalize essential utilities Nationalize resources to fund societySalary caps on top level executives Guaranteed living wagesUniversal right to unionize
(DIR) Post #AZy7DAmMozHZXynu3E by GreenKnight23@mastodon.social
2023-09-20T19:49:46Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@freemo @klawansky if you're in a political position and your emotions are leading you, you're doing it wrong.If your elected officials use words like "we feel" or "we hope" when describing legislation, they're not doing their jobs."I feel you are a centrist troll.""You are a centrist troll."See, completely different connotations.
(DIR) Post #AZy7iPs0lNjFKPLGGu by freemo@qoto.org
2023-09-20T19:55:24Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
@pyranose > Funny what you think is left are all basic human rights in my country. Are you suggesting the left doesnt support human rights, therefore by being human rights they are not on left oriented ideas?Like ok, its a basic human right, so the left has some principles such as supporting basic human rights... how are you even disagrring?> I’ll give you some real left actions:So again your saying the left doesnt support human rights? and as such when i pointed that out was wrong?> Increase taxes on the rich to post war levels. Heading in this direction are both things Biden and Obama did, increasing tax on the rich.> Close all corporate tax loopholes. Against something both Obama and Biden worked towards by proposing on quite a few occasions to close corperate loopholes in the tax code. > Nationalize essential utilities That would indeed be an extremely left move. As far as I know no democrats have pushed for this. But when all of their policies are clearly on the left, not having pushed for some arbitrary policy on the left you want to see doesnt stop them from being left, it just makes them a less-extreme version of the left, that is all.> Nationalize resources to fund societyThis has been pushed for by both Obama and Biden. For example the nationalized fund that paid off school loans would be an example> Salary caps on top level executives I dont know if they actively pushed for this as a law or not. But they have stated several times they agree with this stance.> Guaranteed living wagesBoth Obama and Biden have consistently pushed for increases to try to get us to a living wage.> Universal right to unionizeBoth Obama and Biden have pushed to support the rights of unions to be forced on workers against their will and removing the right for workers to choose for themselves to join a union.. so yea they have done this too, its a big issue.So almost everything you listed applies to Obama, Biden, and most democrats... glad we could agree democrats are on the left.@georgetakei
(DIR) Post #AZy8FBEwB9qtVegkTo by wren@universeodon.com
2023-09-20T20:01:19Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@freemo @klawansky nope. that's not what i was suggesting. at all. interesting take tho-too exhausted to say any more than what @klawansky said, which was quite to the point, I thought. What kind of conscience are you suggesting the GOP has? seems to be malfunctioning quite a bit of late.again, too exhausted to get into this. so hope this clears things up for you. take care.
(DIR) Post #AZy8LEmZv8a2EaJPTk by Aviva_Gary@noc.social
2023-09-20T20:02:27Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@georgetakei Ah but they are focusing on their priorities...(Still not great or a way to run much of anything)
(DIR) Post #AZy8PpwLiAjodQ4jmC by freemo@qoto.org
2023-09-20T20:03:14Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@wren Ok, but i never made **any** comment about if their conscious was good or bad, only that they followed it.So why would you make a comment, and be mad about it, asking if they have a good or bad conscious when my comment didnt claim anything about the **quality** of their conscious?In fact I made it quite clear I hate the GOP, so if anything if you were to read between the lines and infer something wouldnt it be that I feel the GOP has a bad conscious?@klawansky
(DIR) Post #AZy9WmgYJLESWOYzAm by wren@universeodon.com
2023-09-20T20:15:43Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@freemo @klawansky ok, yeah. you're right. I read between the lines and inferred horrible things. you win and my apologies. please allow me to be exhausted trouble free now. thank-you.
(DIR) Post #AZy9lfTLPY66UiTyEK by freemo@qoto.org
2023-09-20T20:18:24Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@wren Thank you, apologies accepted. It takes a big person to admit when your wrong, thank you for showing you arent a piece of shit, its appreciated and refreshing on an internet filled with the contrary.@klawansky
(DIR) Post #AZyD1QDwAjOzhKTnOq by katrinakatrinka@infosec.exchange
2023-09-20T20:54:52Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@freemo @pyranose @georgetakei So, you slept through the bank and auto manufacturer bailouts by Obama and the anti-labor actions Biden took against rail workers who wanted to strike?Not all of the things you said Obama and Biden pursued are even possible in our current capitalist representative democracy. It'd be illegal for the government to seize private businesses. The government only seizes private property from poor and disadvantaged people who don't have the resources to fight police civil asset forfeiture in lengthy court processes.
(DIR) Post #AZyDgeHWoH0NAdokrI by freemo@qoto.org
2023-09-20T21:02:17Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
@katrinakatrinka So, you slept through the bank and auto manufacturer bailouts by ObamaThats a fair point, that would be a right-leaning decision.But you are aware if a politician does 20 policy decisions ont he left and 1 policy decision on the right, that it is still highly erroneous to try to claim that person is on the right, dont ya think? anti-labor actions Biden took against rail workers who wanted to strike?This one im not familiar with. If true see above comment. But what are you referncing here? Not all of the things you said Obama and Biden pursued are even possible in our current capitalist representative democracy.Ok, so what? How does that change if Obama is left or right wing if infrastructure or other politicians or whatever happens to make his goals impossible. That literally changes nothing about where Obama is in the spectrum even if true, or Biden. It’d be illegal for the government to seize private businesses.We’ve done it in the past. When we passed anti-monopoly laws companies were seized, divided, and resold. The government only seizes private property from poor and disadvantaged people who don’t have the resources to fight police civil asset forfeiture in lengthy court processes.They certainly do that too… though still no relevance to what your responding to.@pyranose @georgetakei
(DIR) Post #AZyGjg9yaCmbj8QDEO by ceoln@qoto.org
2023-09-20T21:36:29Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@freemo That depends on what they think is right. If someone is voting for terrible things, I'm not going to admire them for it because it's what their conscience tells them. I care somewhat more about what the politicians are voting for, than about whether they are showing an Independent Spirit by doing it. I'm fine with pols following the party line, if that line is actually good.If a small group of Republicans is willing to harm the nation as a whole if they don't get to gut education, social services, food safety, etc, that is decidedly not what I "**want**" in any sense.@georgetakei
(DIR) Post #AZyH6A6dvMPIyTaEZU by freemo@qoto.org
2023-09-20T21:40:31Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@ceoln That depends on what they think is right. If someone is voting for terrible things, I’m not going to admire them for it because it’s what their conscience tells them. I care somewhat more about what the politicians are voting for, than about whether they are showing an Independent Spirit by doing it. I’m fine with pols following the party line, if that line is actually good.If you think independently and make good decisions, and that just happens to be in agreement with the party line, fine I have no problem with that.But when its clear you are following the party line for sake of following the party line, espcially considering how poor a job the party is doing, then yea we have a problem. The problem is, I cant rely on you to make the right choice should the party become corrupted, so its not a good safeguard.The democrats sadly have shown a pattern of voting the party line for the sake of voting the party line, group think has become very central to both parties, though moreso to the left it seems (based on george’s post)@georgetakei
(DIR) Post #AZyJmOV6zlcngoIIXg by katrinakatrinka@infosec.exchange
2023-09-20T22:10:35Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@freemo @pyranose @georgetakei It was just last year, but it was close to Christmas, so you may have missed it. It was so bad since Biden has always made a big deal about riding and liking the trains.https://www.reuters.com/world/us/biden-signs-bill-block-us-railroad-strike-2022-12-02/Anti-monopoly laws don't seize companies. They break up companies. The companies are still owned by private entities. I think there's a lot of talking past each other going on in this conversation because the US understanding of socialism is really inconsistent with how other countries use it. For example, a lot of policies Nixon and Regan passed would be considered by current GOP as leftist.The best way to debate is first to agree on definitions. Then discuss the subjects.
(DIR) Post #AZyKwIHR4tYDFMBK9Q by freemo@qoto.org
2023-09-20T22:23:34Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@katrinakatrinka > It was just last year, but it was close to Christmas, so you may have missed it. It was so bad since Biden has always made a big deal about riding and liking the trains.I am a COVID research scientist and was in Israel for 2 years doing research. So yea this sounds like I missed it cause i was out of town.> Anti-monopoly laws don't seize companies. They break up companies. The companies are still owned by private entities. Well more or less yes.. the company is seized, and they are compensated with either money or shares in the new company (which of course can be sold for the money).Were you suggesting stealing the money from the investors completely and leaving them with nothing? Even if we seized large companies to replace it with a government owned equievelant, obviously we would have to pay the owners a fair market value to do so (which is how its always done).I mean at that point your starting to go way past just the left and your starting to sound more like communism. Even when homes are seized fromt he poor (as mentioned) they are paid a "fair market value" (or at least it is supposed to be fair).> I think there's a lot of talking past each other going on in this conversation because the US understanding of socialism is really inconsistent with how other countries use it.My bio says I live in the Netherlands (its old i just spent 2 years in israel but i still have my Dutch home)... Why are you assuming our misunderstanding is because of the US? For the record I have spent the majority of my life living around the world, usually move to a new country every few months or years (though NL is a permanent fixture for me). I have lived in most european countries, worked, got health care, all the stuff.For the record though many europeans sometimes use socialism wrong too.. for example (as has been stated by multiple prime ministers) there are no socialist countries in europe only social-welfare capitalist countries. Which is accurate.> For example, a lot of policies Nixon and Regan passed would be considered by current GOP as leftist.Absolutely.. Being ont he left does **not** mean every single one of your policies needs to be left leaning. If the majority are on the left, then you lean left. Nixon and Regand certainly had more policies on the left than most modern day republicans. But the bulk of their policies were still right. So it would be completely accurate to say Nixon and Regan where on the right, but closer to the center, than many of those in the GOP today. More importantly, to solidify this, those int he GOP may see some of his policies as left, but most (at least the ones with more than 2 brain cells) woul be educated enough to still identify the fact that these people were right of center.> The best way to debate is first to agree on definitions. Then discuss the subjects.I tend to agree with that. As of the moment I havent seen any definitions we likely disagree on. We seem to agree, so far, on the definition of socialism at least (well i dont know yours, but we agree the american view of it is often wrong)@pyranose @georgetakei
(DIR) Post #AZyLzYeMltxIq81lcO by ferricoxide@evil.social
2023-09-20T22:33:56.573Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@pyranose@fosstodon.org @freemo@qoto.org @georgetakei@universeodon.com I tend to think caps and floors are less ideal than indexed thresholds and associated taxation multipliers.
(DIR) Post #AZyLzZzfmAap0V0IT2 by freemo@qoto.org
2023-09-20T22:35:21Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@ferricoxide I would tend to agree.@georgetakei @pyranose
(DIR) Post #AZyP3C2J5huRj0eOiO by ceoln@qoto.org
2023-09-20T23:09:40Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@freemoThinking independently and making good decisions are not necessarily correlated! People can independently come to extremely bad conclusions.I’m just saying that the quality of the decisions is far more important than whether they are arrived at independently.Certainly if the group is going in a bad direction, then independence is good. But it’s good because it increases the odds of getting to a good place, not because of some inherent virtue.@georgetakei
(DIR) Post #AZyPZoAiq44tGe8fYW by freemo@qoto.org
2023-09-20T23:15:32Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@ceoln Thinking independently and making good decisions are not necessarily correlated! People can independently come to extremely bad conclusions.They sure can. Which is why i said only thinking independently while making bad choices is bad.That isnt an argument against the need for independent though. Just means other qualities are needed to make a politician a good one. I’m just saying that the quality of the decisions is far more important than whether they are arrived at independently.Thats not an argument against the need for independent thought. All your arguing for is that you want both qualities, independent thoght AND good decisions… and yes this is true.I never said independent thought is the most important quality to have.. others may be more important… but it is still one of the list of important qualities to have, and thus desirable Certainly if the group is going in a bad direction, then independence is good. But it’s good because it increases the odds of getting to a good place, not because of some inherent virtue.Sure i dont care about any inherent virtue either… thing is, its also good when the group is headed in a good direction. Why?because it is a safeguard against the future when/if the group makes bad decisions.There are quite a few other secondary reasons its important too.. the main one being that group think prevents ideas from being raised and discussed in opposition as it drives polarity.@georgetakei
(DIR) Post #AZyQSqxy9QozrRQB1M by ceoln@qoto.org
2023-09-20T23:12:15Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@freemoWe have a very concrete example here, where a few “independent” Republicans are holding the government hostage because they want to gut important programs.This may be “independent thinking” in some sense, but there’s nothing good about it. They have diverged from the (bad) party line, in an EVEN WORSE direction.@georgetakei
(DIR) Post #AZyQSrilLSFgCZJXxQ by freemo@qoto.org
2023-09-20T23:25:27Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@ceolnActually its proof of the opposite.So you are saying there is a good bill being proposed with good programs and the reason it was held up is because the republicans were split 44 (in favor) - 5 (against) and that is the fault of those 5 free thinkers. Meanwhile the democrats all 48 voted against the bill because they all stick together and tow the party line and see it as a GOP proposed bill.So why are you blaming the 5 free thinkers in the GOP for stopping the bill rather than the 48 democrats who arent free thinkers?Sorry the logic isnt following.@georgetakei
(DIR) Post #AZyRgcEhoW5IBWNMiO by ceoln@qoto.org
2023-09-20T23:39:12Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@freemoWhat? No. There are bipartisan spending bills that have passed the Senate with like 90+ votes. The GOP, which controls the House, has not introduced those bills, or anything else reasonable, despite there having been an agreement basically to do exactly that the other week. The only thing the extreme right has allowed to progress through committee has been junk including new abortion and trans care restrictions and like that.The Democrats in the House can’t just vote for a bill that hasn’t even been introduced; that is not how it works At All.I think your mental model of how the government actually works is a little oversimplified? We can both agree that it SHOULD be simpler and more sensible, but it’s not.Now if you’re mostly just saying “would that we had people as willing to cause trouble for good as these extreme Republicans are to cause trouble for evil”, I agree with the sentiment! :)I just don’t think willingness to cause trouble for what you believe is a virtue in itself; it depends what you believe in.@georgetakei
(DIR) Post #AZySEgR8hcwZ3gR7JY by ceoln@qoto.org
2023-09-20T23:45:21Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@freemoYou seem to be cherry-picking only cases where “independent thinking” leads to good outcomes. If the groups is heading in a good direction, and someone who would prefer a bad direction uses their “independence” to cause trouble and slow that down or redirect it, that’s bad.So it can be good or bad, whatever direction the group is currently headed, depending exactly on whether the “independence” is a deviation in a good or a bad direction.I guess this is contrary to the American Founding Narrative or something :) but it seems kind of self-evident to me.@georgetakei
(DIR) Post #AZySfnO4y6JgQyvuQS by freemo@qoto.org
2023-09-20T23:50:13Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@ceoln @georgetakei What? No. There are bipartisan spending bills that have passed the Senate with like 90+ votes.We arent talking about bills, you are talking about this one which supposidly is a great bill and these 5 GOP people are ruining it The GOP, which controls the House, has not introduced those bills, or anything else reasonable, despite there having been an agreement basically to do exactly that the other weekWait so now your saying the bill isnt reasonable? Soooooo… arent you saying that those 5 independent thinking GoP members stopped a bad bill from passing… ok so why are you saying independent thought is a bad thing, isnt this an example then of the independent thought of members of the GOP being a good thing since those 5 people just stopped this bad bill from going through?It makes no sense, you are attacking them at being at a standstill for disagreeing, yet, dont actually want the bill to pass and literally all of the DNC agrees with these 5 GOP members and yet… somehow its a bad thing they dont all agree… man this is making me dizzy. The Democrats in the House can’t just vote for a bill that hasn’t even been introduced; that is not how it works At AllWhat, there was just a procedral vote, in the house, to introduce a bill. That vote was conducted by the house which consists of GOP and Dems…. of course the Dems get to vote when introducing bills… then they vote again when it gets to the sentate to pass it. I think your mental model of how the government actually works is a little oversimplified? We can both agree that it SHOULD be simpler and more sensible, but it’s not.Pretty sure its not, I could tell you step by step the process to get a bill passed. This is the first one where it gets introduced int he house and involves votes from both sides to introduce it. Now if you’re mostly just saying “would that we had people as willing to cause trouble for good as these extreme Republicans are to cause trouble for evil”, I agree with the sentiment! :)I mean that part is fairly valid, doing good and independent thought are obviously both criteria. With the democrats and the republicans doing evil not much else matters. But that doesnt make independent thought any less of a required virtue (along with goodness)
(DIR) Post #AZyUKHPWrSub5UTmqG by ceoln@qoto.org
2023-09-21T00:08:47Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@freemo“We arent talking about bills, you are talking about this one which supposidly is a great bill and these 5 GOP people are ruining it”No, that’s what YOU suggested, and I said “What? No.”. I hope you’re arguing in good faith here! There isn’t just a single bill involved, and Congress doesn’t actually work the way the little “how a bill becomes law” pamphlets say.The 5 extreme Republicans are preventing the bipartisan bills that have passed the Senate, and could pass the House, from being introduced in the normal process. If the Democrats tried to introduce them on their own hook, every Republican would vote against them, because it would threaten their control to let them do that. And if Mitch forced them to a vote over the objections of the extremists, there would be a similar revolt.If you don’t understand how that works, I sympathize, but I assure you it’s not “the House Democrats refuse to vote for the bipartisan bills that have passed the Senate just because they would have a Republican label on them”. Some Democrats have been trying to persuade Mitch to introduce them and let them pass with broad D support, but so far he doesn’t have the spine.@georgetakei
(DIR) Post #AZyUQbg4QH3xgJEX32 by JonKramer@qoto.org
2023-09-21T00:09:55Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@freemo @georgetakei , I have a hard time believing they are voting their conscious. These guys are mostly just pissing in the soup.
(DIR) Post #AZyUnqAKiqtRHAT28m by freemo@qoto.org
2023-09-21T00:14:05Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@ceoln You seem to be cherry-picking only cases where “independent thinking” leads to good outcomes. If the groups is heading in a good direction, and someone who would prefer a bad direction uses their “independence” to cause trouble and slow that down or redirect it, that’s bad.You are making assumptions, I didnt say or do that.For starters I didnt cherry pick any cases. George picked the case and we are discussing it. It was quite clearly picked by someone else. How could I cherry pick that?I have also stated many times that while independent thinking is a requirement for any healthy effective legislature, it is not the only requirement. I have stated clearly that it requires both indepednent thought, and moral judgement to be effective.Therefore if all we look at is independent thiking we will see both bad and good examples, because it is only one among many required properties. So it can be good or bad, whatever direction the group is currently headed, depending exactly on whether the “independence” is a deviation in a good or a bad direction.No thats incorrect.If a person is a bad person who doesnt engage in independent thought, then they will join a group that is a bad group. Bad people choose to want to be a part of things that are by extension bad. When a person joins party A or party B to join they will go with the one they perceive to be the one that they agree with the most (though maybe not agree with eniterly)… this leads to bad people forming bad groups.So if i am a bad person, in a bad group, as tends to be the case, then i have two options, follow my own bad independent thought, or the groups bad collective thought. When you make a bad decision it isnt because you were thinking independently, its because your a bad person and would have made that bad decision either way.Bad people joining good groups isnt the norm. But even when it does happen. Then if they act independently and do a bad thing, it isnt the fact that they are indepedent that is to blame, its the fact that they are morally corrupt (as a good person wouldnt do that). If that same person were to follow the group it would now result in a good act, but eliminate the protection against the group turning bad int he future. So while you may have gotten a good result this time, it is still a far more dangerous state than a good person thinking independently.@georgetakei
(DIR) Post #AZyVG3807dFjaPpMpM by ceoln@qoto.org
2023-09-21T00:19:13Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@freemoYou were cherry-picking when you gave an example of independence being good because it can lead a good person to resist a good group going bad, without mentioning the obvious possibility of independence leading a bad person to resist a group doing good; that’s what I was referring to.If it helps any, I will definitely agree that independent thinking is a good quality in a good person. :)But I will maintain that it’s not a good quality in the particular Republicans in question.@georgetakei
(DIR) Post #AZyVdYSFogB3P9VcB6 by JonKramer@qoto.org
2023-09-21T00:23:28Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@freemo @pyranose @georgetakei Both Biden and obama never did anything but increase military spending. Obama ramped up drone bombing. Biden has continued the border policies of the trump administration, including family separations. GITMO is still open. There is little or no movement on major polluters, curbing drug company monopolies, and a net increase in fossil fuel land leases. In many cases, it is a lack of action from the Biden and Obama administrations, but that isn't a left position either. It is a pretty far right position. Don't pass a law for federally protected abortion rights... And I don't think Obama adopting Mitt Romney's healthcare plan is a left wing plan either, and there is no push from Biden for a single payer system. In fact, I believe biden took that off the table in the Dem primaries back in 2020. I see both Obama and Biden as right wingers. I'm far from the only one (https://www.politicalcompass.org/uselection2020) :
(DIR) Post #AZyVmxgFOgmMFNXWQi by Free_Idealist@pleroma.nobodyhasthe.biz
2023-09-21T00:25:09.347830Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@JonKramer @freemo @pyranose @georgetakei Whoever made this and everyone who agrees with it should commit suicide.
(DIR) Post #AZyVxWIpWkEkWQcZMm by JonKramer@qoto.org
2023-09-21T00:25:56Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Free_Idealist @pyranose @freemo @georgetakei Reality sucks, eh?
(DIR) Post #AZyVxX5OcB5Kx3LM48 by Free_Idealist@pleroma.nobodyhasthe.biz
2023-09-21T00:27:01.296609Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@JonKramer @pyranose @freemo @georgetakei Yes.
(DIR) Post #AZyWyXvZ4VgxnxnAfY by freemo@qoto.org
2023-09-21T00:38:25Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@ceoln @georgetakei “No, that’s what YOU suggestedI never suggested it was a good bill at all. In fact I never said anything about if the bill was good or badThe only thing i said is that the fact that the GOP doesnt engage in group think and people will disagree with their party and judge things independently is a good thing.Regardless my stance works either way.If it was a good bill then the 5 dissenting GoP voters int he house were not to blame, the 212 democrats who voted against it knowing it was a good bill but just to follow partiy lines are to blame. Ergo group think not independence is at fault.If it was a bad bill, then that means those 5 dissenting GOP members out of the 435 members were the only ones engaging in independent thought and by breaking party lines were able to stop a bill that would have otherwise been bad and passed… again group think fails us and the independent thinkers save the day.So literally what i said is accurate no matter how you dice it. I hope you’re arguing in good faith hereI very much am. I choose that argument because i mistakingly thought you thought the bill should be passed.. but as i point out above my argument works the other way just as well. There isn’t just a single bill involvedYes this vote we are discussing is a single bill involved, it is called the Appropriations Bill. I dont even think you can have a single vote to pass multiple bills unless you collect those bills under a single bill. Which is exactly what we have here.The name of that single bill is “Defense Fiscal Year 2024 Appropriations Bill”This bill however itself contains many smaller bills collected into one. Congress doesn’t actually work the way the little “how a bill becomes law” pamphlets say.When did I say that?Ok… i mean no one here said it did… The 5 extreme Republicans are preventing the bipartisan bills that have passed the Senate, and could pass the House, from being introduced in the normal processI mean that is mostly correct… but your language seems weird… You said earlier now it was a bad bill and should be stopped (earlier i thought you thought it was a good bill but whatever)… So if its a bad bill, then they arent extreme for stopping it… i mean unless you think all the democrats who voted against it are also extreme for the same reason. If the Democrats tried to introduce them on their own hook, every Republican would vote against them, because it would threaten their control to let them do that.Ahh so the GOP would respond to the Dems introducing the bill the same way the Dems respond to the GOP introducing a bill… interesting, yea I can see how that is the GOPs fault lolBut yea its not right from either side… also not relevant to the context here. If you don’t understand how that works, I sympathizeThankfully I do but I assure you it’s not “the House Democrats refuse to vote for the bipartisan bills that have passed the Senate just because they would have a Republican label on them”Why are you using quotes around a thing I never said?What I did say is that bills introduced by either side tend to be rejected by the other and we have very few if any bipartisan bills… but a bill is only bipartisan AFTER the vote so a statement like “refuse to vote for the bipartisan….” makes no sense. Some Democrats have been trying to persuade Mitch to introduce them and let them pass with broad D support, but so far he doesn’t have the spine.Mitch will oppose bipartisanism at every turn, of course he wont let them…. just as the democrats do the same in return.
(DIR) Post #AZyX18scec0AzSeaw4 by freemo@qoto.org
2023-09-21T00:38:54Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@JonKramer I mean thats kinda true im sure.. what i mean to say is "not tow the party line"@georgetakei
(DIR) Post #AZyXIB8lVGN4vKKOhs by JonKramer@qoto.org
2023-09-21T00:42:01Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@freemo @georgetakei , that terminology I can agree with. But I'm not sure the GQP has a party line anymore. If anything, their platform is ' support trump,' and that seems to be what these clowns are doing.... An argument can be made supporting any position here, and I think that is intentional by the GQP as a whole.
(DIR) Post #AZyXRmSs6MzdHzJM9Y by freemo@qoto.org
2023-09-21T00:43:43Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@ceolnUsing the term “cherry picking” for a hypothetical example of where having independence while being a good person is a weird use of the word… cherry picking is usually where you take real world data and ignore part of it… not where you give an example of a particular thing, yes its cherry picked, thats the point, its an example of something that happens. If it helps any, I will definitely agree that independent thinking is a good quality in a good person. :)Considering this is what i said like 1000 times over, then you were never disagreeing with me. You literally just admirted you’ve been 100% agreement this whole time as this is exactly what I reiterated many times. But I will maintain that it’s not a good quality in the particular Republicans in question.You are literally saying it was a bad bill and shouldnt have passed, and that these 5 republicans stopped it because they were acting independently… yet this was a bad thing?I dunno your logic isnt adding up. What they did, according to you stopped the bill. Stopping the bill is a good thing according to you… yet somehow also a bad thing they were independent in this vote? What?@georgetakei
(DIR) Post #AZyXSmI2ElAF2KiZs0 by ceoln@qoto.org
2023-09-21T00:43:56Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@freemoThere is no “it” which is a single bill that is either good or bad; that is an inaccurate oversimplification of what is going on here, and does not at all capture the situation. I’ve tried to explain that several times. The defense appropriations bill is just one version of one bill of a set of bills that need to be passed to keep the government open.If you’d like to find out more about the actual situation that the OP was commenting on, the Axios article I linked to might be a helpful start.@georgetakei
(DIR) Post #AZyXjTzlVe7hDg8cE4 by ceoln@qoto.org
2023-09-21T00:46:55Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@freemoI had the impression that you were saying this independence was a good trait in everyone, bad people as well as good (since you seemed to be saying it’s something we want even in for instance extreme right Republicans). My mistake. :)And again, the reason you don’t find the logic adding up is that you think this is about one vote on one bill. It isn’t. At all.@georgetakei
(DIR) Post #AZyYORXvWH4vUseFTU by freemo@qoto.org
2023-09-21T00:54:16Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@JonKramer Both Biden and obama never did anything but increase military spending.I never claimed Biden or OBama were effectual in the least. We are only talking about if they are left or right based on their votes nothing more. Obama ramped up drone bombing. Biden has continued the border policies of the trump administration, including family separations. GITMO is still open. There is little or no movement on major polluters, curbing drug company monopolies, and a net increase in fossil fuel land leases.I mean all of these are fine points of the failures of the administration. But aside from touching on immigration policy none of that has to do with right-left leaning. A drone bombinb, however wrong, in and of itself is not a left or right choice.The monopoly situation would be a valid right wing thing… but neither Obama nor Biden made any political decisions to support monopolies. Granted they didnt have the oppertunity to do much to oppose it… but lack of action or ineffective action is not an indication of a stance. so this is moot. In many cases, it is a lack of action from the Biden and Obama administrations, but that isn’t a left position either. It is a pretty far right position.The what now… lack of action, as a general concept, regardless of what the action is, is a right-wing thing? I hope im misunderstanding this part, cause that sounds absurd to say. And I don’t think Obama adopting Mitt Romney’s healthcare plan is a left wing plan either,Are you saying Obama care, literally universal healthcare, is a right wing thing because he decided to incorperate some things from mitt? What? If he hadnt then the bill wouldnt pass as it needed GOP support and we wouldnt have universal healthcare…. I mean yea its shit, but saying that a compromise towards universal healthcare that is shitter than it could be but needed to get the vote is somehow the same as being right wing… i mean.. ok… I cant even with that. and there is no push from Biden for a single payer system.push? As far as I know Biden has always supported single payer systems. Surehe hasnt been able to ever make it happen. But his voting and position has been clear. In fact, I believe biden took that off the table in the Dem primaries back in 2020.You need to be specific what you mean here for me to judge it.. that MAY be damning against him in this context. I see both Obama and Biden as right wingers. I’m far from the only one (https://www.politicalcompass.org/uselection2020) :I agree you absolutely are not the only one. You and many people are wrong about it, sure.@pyranose @georgetakei
(DIR) Post #AZyYSZR28Bfv7dOMGu by freemo@qoto.org
2023-09-21T00:55:04Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@JonKramer Yea the reality that people believe this does indeed suck.@Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei
(DIR) Post #AZyYpxFTl5ztdh8bZY by ceoln@qoto.org
2023-09-21T00:11:49Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@freemoHere’s an article that goes into some of that:https://www.axios.com/2023/09/18/mccarthy-democrats-spending-bills-avert-shutdown@georgetakei
(DIR) Post #AZyYpxtXMA2Xdvsb0i by ceoln@qoto.org
2023-09-21T00:22:28Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@freemoAnd sorry, not “Mitch”, I meant “Kevin”. I can’t reliably spell either last name, but apparently I can’t keep the first names straight either. 🤪@georgetakei
(DIR) Post #AZyYpyfkSubY3SR69o by ceoln@qoto.org
2023-09-21T00:32:02Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@freemo(And it’s also not just 5 Republicans; that’s the number that voted against the procedural thing to advance even their own DoD funding bill. But there are more than that keeping McCarthy from sticking to the bipartisan agreement, threatening to remove him as leader if he proposes anything a Democrat will vote for, etc. The party is a mess. And “independent thinking” isn’t helping. :) )@georgetakei
(DIR) Post #AZyYpzT1Vi1IWHURxg by freemo@qoto.org
2023-09-21T00:59:07Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@ceoln And it’s also not just 5 Republicans; that’s the number that voted against the procedural thing to advance even their own DoD funding bill.I mean its the only one we are discussing here at least. Anything said here was largely about this bill and this vote.. other incidents may be valid but not what has so far been discussed is all. But there are more than that keeping McCarthy from sticking to the bipartisan agreement, threatening to remove him as leader if he proposes anything a Democrat will vote for, etc. The party is a mess. And “independent thinking” isn’t helping. :)What you basically just said was, a bunch of GOP people are pressuring McCarthy if he doesnt “tow the party line”, and somehow GOP members who do not tow the party line (will vote against the party) are the problem? Sounds to me you jut gave yet another example against your own argument.@georgetakei
(DIR) Post #AZyYq0T3n3dxcgVzeq by ceoln@qoto.org
2023-09-21T00:35:56Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@freemoOn the subject of “why don’t the Democrats just vote for it?” From https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/09/19/house-republicans-spending-vote/“That scene was remarkable to veteran lawmakers who have never seen the minority party provide the votes to pass the rule vote, and it greatly irked the far-right wing of the conference, who have since pledged to oust McCarthy if he leans on Democrats again. That perspective has forced Republicans to only pass bills through their narrow-ranks.”That is, the party is so unstable that if McCarthy allows to the floor anything the Democrats will vote for, especially if it wouldn’t pass otherwise, he may be replaced by someone who will promise not to do that.@georgetakei
(DIR) Post #AZyZ0hYISSm88v42Mq by JonKramer@qoto.org
2023-09-21T01:01:16Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@freemo @Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei , I am sure someone can come up with a counter to the argument. But I have yet to see it. And without any argument to the contrary, and what I have seen, I tend to agree with the placement of those people on that scale. Just for an example, there are reasons Biden was called "The Senator from MBNA", a credit card company. https://www.nationalreview.com/2008/08/senator-mbna-byron-york/
(DIR) Post #AZyZAGRk5ismyJYfyq by freemo@qoto.org
2023-09-21T01:02:57Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@ceoln On the subject of “why don’t the Democrats just vote for it?”Why do you keep putting quotes around things I never said and dont paraphrase my position in any way accurately?I said if its a good bill they should vote for it. If they dont then they, as hundreds, are to blame far more so than 5 GOP members. If its a bad bill then those 5 GOP people did the right thing and had a good outcome, yet somehow they are still the bad guy. That is, the party is so unstable that if McCarthy allows to the floor anything the Democrats will vote for, especially if it wouldn’t pass otherwise, he may be replaced by someone who will promise not to do that.Yup, a great example of the harm of group think. Another example that argues against your case.@georgetakei
(DIR) Post #AZyZH58uW69rwP06r2 by JonKramer@qoto.org
2023-09-21T01:04:14Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@freemo @pyranose @georgetakei , my points are intended to indicate that both Biden and Obama were actively pursuing right wing goals. Or, by inaction, allowing right wing goals to become a fait accompli.
(DIR) Post #AZyZL4HzdFBcS69Lns by freemo@qoto.org
2023-09-21T01:04:54Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@JonKramer When i say party line i dont mean "The principles of the party" I mean "We all vote the same way"@georgetakei
(DIR) Post #AZyZgeYvxpkn26MlyC by ceoln@qoto.org
2023-09-21T01:08:51Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@freemoThe quotation marks are intended as a sort of grouping operator, calling out a summary of, in this case, a salient aspect of the discussion, not a literal repeat of anything anyone said. If that’s off-putting, I’ll try to stop doing it.Once again, there is no “it”; there is not one single vote on one single bill involved here. I’m not sure why you aren’t getting that.But let’s pretend that there really is just one single vote in question. Consider the possibility that the bill is bad, and the five Republicans voted against it because it WASN’T BAD ENOUGH. That is, I hope obviously, not ultimately a good thing. Perhaps that helps the logic add up? :)@georgetakei
(DIR) Post #AZya1NbAEO3uV8ICLg by ceoln@qoto.org
2023-09-21T01:12:36Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@freemo“Yup, a great example of the harm of group think. Another example that argues against your case.”Um. But the people doing it are the people that you started off praising for doing what they thought was right, and independent thinking. But now it’s group think? I think we’re sort of going in circles now. :)@georgetakei
(DIR) Post #AZya4UsXcTdhwuuIjI by JonKramer@qoto.org
2023-09-21T01:13:09Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@freemo @pyranose @georgetakeihttps://www.cnbc.com/2020/03/10/biden-says-he-wouldd-veto-medicare-for-all-as-coronavirus-focuses-attention-on-health.html
(DIR) Post #AZyaGPWRMQ3soNFaNc by freemo@qoto.org
2023-09-21T01:15:16Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@ceolnAt this point i think you are not arguing in good-faith, but i also suspect it is not intentional and you think you are (so im not mad)..There is an it, a very large it with many different sections… obviously you can agree with parts and disagree with others.. but there is one thing collectively to be voted. It is aggregately a good thing (the vote should be passed) or it is aggregately a bad thing (the vote should fail and it should go off for more revisions).Just because a book has many chapers, and some may be good or some may be bad, it is erroneous to say there is no book and that it is not possible to say if the book, on aggregate, was good or bad. that is an inaccurate oversimplification of what is going on here, and does not at all capture the situation.No it isnt, because it isnt an explanation of the entire situation, so it cant be an oversimplification of it. It is meant to describe on specific thing… either you think the vote should have passed, or you think it shouldnt… no matter how complex the system may be, this binary choice is still a binary choice (of course what you do after you dont pass it, wither improve it or drop it is another matter).You keep trying to do mental gymnastics to some how make these 5 GOP people look bad for voting against party lines, yet somehow in the same breath agree that their vote is the one you agree should have been made… sorry you just cant do it and the more you try to pain that picture the weaker your argument will look. The defense appropriations bill is just one version of one bill of a set of bills that need to be passed to keep the government open.If you saying there are other critical bills out thre other than this one… yea sure, of course… your point? If you’d like to find out more about the actual situation that the OP was commenting on, the Axios article I linked to might be a helpful start.I’ve read (a lot of) the text of the bill, am intimately familiar with the procedures for passing new bills, am aware of the vote,am aware of the revision and anotation process, etc.Can’t imagine what about the situation that article is suppose to explain I havent already covered. So far you’ve said nothing I wasnt already aware of, and i have said nothing inaccurate about the process (at least not that you pointed out)… so what exactly do you think that article has in it that may be new to me? Obviously if there is something I’d be more than happy to read it, but my impression is it will just go over the stuff I am already aware of in far greater detail… maybe im wrong though. But yea, let me know why the article might be worth my time and ill happily give a read if it sounds like it will be.@georgetakei
(DIR) Post #AZyazX0yLnPf522xn6 by freemo@qoto.org
2023-09-21T01:23:25Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@ceoln I had the impression that you were saying this independence was a good trait in everyone, bad people as well as goodIndependence from your choosen groups of association is a good trait in everyone. It is not, however, a sufficient trait. And having one good insufficient trait is not an indication that you will be a good person or make good choices. since you seemed to be saying it’s something we want even in for instance extreme right RepublicansYou have now added the word “extreme” twice despite me objecting to the description of these 5 people as extreme for voting in line with democrats.I am saying it is a quality we want in republicans as a whole however. Because groupthink means they follow a immoral party, and without dissent no change occurs.Republicans who think independently will still be bad actors like their party, so in and of itself wont immediately give us good results. But since they were going to be bad if they followed the party too, no harm caused.. BUT this does mean now the republican party has the mechnisms in place for change and dissent, and yes, that is what we want. My mistake. :)I know :) And again, the reason you don’t find the logic adding up is that you think this is about one vote on one bill. It isn’t. At all.“this is about”… what is this here? If you mean the discussion thread, then yes, we are discussing very specifically one vote on one bill (a very large one containing smaller bills)… so yes that is exactly what this is about.Now if your pointing out the dynamic in the senate is more complex than this one bill.. sure, of course it is, I am quite aware of that too. and guess what, being aware of all that, your logic still seems nonsensical for the reasons I described.@georgetakei
(DIR) Post #AZybYkchkJhBQDUQBE by freemo@qoto.org
2023-09-21T01:29:47Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@JonKramer I am sure someone can come up with a counter to the argument. But I have yet to see it.Which argument? That the plot above sucks and isnt remotely accurate?Of course someone has, we just spent quite a while doing line by line on policy and decisions and showing how virtually every vote Biden or Obama have ever made has been left leaning with very very few examples of right leaning ones.Now you may not agree with the argument, which is fine your allowed to be wrong, but to claim you have never even seen an argument formulated, when we just got through with one, is clearly erroneous. And without any argument to the contrary,Except the one I just spent quite some time laying out… and what I have seenWhich seems selective… I tend to agree with the placement of those people on that scale.I would expect you would incorrectly draw that conclusion, given your selective eye sight :) Just for an example, there are reasons Biden was called “The Senator from MBNA”, a credit card company.Do you think in order to be left you have to be anti-large company or something? I mean sure that starts to develop at the very radicalized extreme ends of the left… but no hating large companies is not a strict requirement barrier to the left. Assuming of course those businesses are well regulated (an unregulated business would be more of a right thing)@Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei
(DIR) Post #AZybe4c4qrH2rpja1A by ceoln@qoto.org
2023-09-21T01:30:47Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@freemoI disagree that there is anything good about dissenting from an immoral party in an even more immoral direction. Simply causing trouble does not cause the party to have mechanisms for change and dissent in any significant sense.I don’t recall you objecting to the word “extreme” before. And in any case, they are extreme. They voted with the Democrats not because they agree with them that the bill cuts too much; they voted against the bill (actually against the rule to allow the bill to advance) because they didn’t think it cut enough. They’re extreme.And no, the discussion thread is not only about one particular rule vote on one particular defense appropriations bill. But I doubt I’m going to convince you of that.@georgetakei
(DIR) Post #AZyc5DqSdRmxJoPKb2 by freemo@qoto.org
2023-09-21T01:35:41Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@JonKramer @pyranose my points are intended to indicate that both Biden and Obama were actively pursuing right wing goals.Youve provided very few of those that were actually left-wing and line up with his actions… only 1 out of your list. Or, by inaction, allowing right wing goals to become a fait accompli.In action is invalid. Saying someone who didnt act is right wing is completely proposturous and completely makes your stance hard to take seriously.That said your one valid example of him have a stance on a single issue that is right-wing is great and all… but as I’ve said before we just had a discussion where about 20 things were listed about obama in the thread that were all clearly left-wing policy positions and votes and a total of I think 2 things (between you and one other person) who points out right-wing stance on issues… that would clearly result in a strong-left lean.Even if i took every single thing you said that I found erroneous as examples as actual examples of right-wing activity and didnt debate it… we still wind up with like 4x more examples of him taking a left stance than a right stance and even then he is still very clearly, in aggregate, on the left.@georgetakei
(DIR) Post #AZyc5dfic0e1Q1a7Si by JonKramer@qoto.org
2023-09-21T01:35:47Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@freemo @Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakeiI would say that you being in the thick of the forest your sight is blinded by the trees. As for selective eye sight, we all suffer from that. No exceptions to that rule.No, I don’t think to be left you have to be anti large company. I would suggest not being anti large company is a common feature for the right though. I would say being in favor of corporate government enforced monopolies is a strong indication you are pretty far right wing. With almost no room for exceptions to that rule. I would also argue that ‘unregulated businesses is not a right wing position. The right loves mountains of regulations that support their major donors, and inhibit competition. That privatize profits, while socializing costs like pollution.
(DIR) Post #AZyc8cOlnq0kL24hEG by ceoln@qoto.org
2023-09-21T01:36:18Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@freemoIt seems at this point that we just think about things too differently to make much progress in this discussion; you will remain convinced that I am doing mental gymnastics around a relatively simple situation, and I will remain convinced that you are focusing on one simple aspect of a much more complex situation.It’s been interesting, though, if only in that I did some reading to satisfy myself about some of the details of the current budget mess. Turns out it’s even worse than I thought. 😝@georgetakei
(DIR) Post #AZycEUUM7mlHXlUITI by JonKramer@qoto.org
2023-09-21T01:37:23Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@freemo @pyranose @georgetakei , you may disagree that I provided more than one example, and that’s OK, you have every right to be wrong.
(DIR) Post #AZyd7nyjMZVhux4TNg by freemo@qoto.org
2023-09-21T01:47:19Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@ceoln The quotation marks are intended as a sort of grouping operator, calling out a summary of, in this case, a salient aspect of the discussion, not a literal repeat of anything anyone said. If that’s off-putting, I’ll try to stop doing it.Might I suggest maybe parenthesis, commas, semicolons or colons. It sounds like semicolons might be betterSo instead of On the subject of “why don’t the Democrats just vote for it?”It would look like thisOn the subject of: why don’t the Democrats just vote for it?” Once again, there is no “it”; there is not one single vote on one single bill involved here.Yes there is an “it” here… the op says the following: They couldn’t even get a bill to fund the Pentagon through a procedural vote because five of their far-right members revolted.This entire discussion thread is around this single vote, for which we are discussing specific ways in which certain people voted… that is the “it”.. yes it exists, and its right there in the first post, that is what we are discussing. I’m not sure why you aren’t getting that.Ditto, the very first post was quite clear this discussion is about a very specific vote. That isnt to say there arent other votes and bills that have played an effect leading up to this one vote, of course there are… but that doesnt change the fact that we are discussing a very specific vote and event. But let’s pretend that there really is just one single vote in question. Consider the possibility that the bill is bad, and the five Republicans voted against it because it WASN’T BAD ENOUGH. That is, I hope obviously, not ultimately a good thing. Perhaps that helps the logic add up? :)I mean, a bad bill still got stopped, so the vote, and the result of the vote is very much a good thing. The motives may be evil, but the action and the result are still good. Likewise if they had not been independent thinkers then it would have passed, and would have been bad.So during this vote their independence, no matter how immoral the motivation, resulted in good happening, where if they were not independent people bad would have happened.Now if your trying to say those 5 PEOPLE arent good (rather than the result of their actions in this case).. then yes I’d agree, their bad people who, happened to make a decision (a vote) that was good. Perhaps that helps the logic add up? :)Not exactly, because you are still saying that as a direct result of their independence good happened on this day.The only thing you just did was explain how they could do a good thing as a result of their independent mentality even when they are bad people and have bad intent. But it was never in question that these were bad people, so not sure how that fixes the logic in anyway.That said I get it, your mad at them for doing the right thing for the wrong reasons… I mean so am I. But thats not what we are arguing, whether they were good people or not was never something we disagreed on.@georgetakei
(DIR) Post #AZydu5Cicc5VF3dPDU by freemo@qoto.org
2023-09-21T01:56:03Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@ceoln Um. But the people doing itNo their not. The people doing it is the whole of the GOP, which i have never praised for independent thought as a whole. I did praise a very very small group (5 people specifically) for engaging in individual thought on a single occasion and pointed out the value of independent thought.I hinted at (and now am explicitly stating) that I do generally see marginally more independence out of the GOP than the democrats, and this property is good however, so lets get that out of the way.It seems you struggle a lot in our conversations with absolutes. The DNC is like 100% groupthink all the time, GOP is like 98% group think almost all the time. This may make the GOP more indepdent relatively, and that property is a good thing. But it hardly means they are free from group think, just maybe slightly less of an issue is all. are the people that you started off praising for doing what they thought was right, and independent thinking.The 5 people out of 200 something, sure, but they are hardle the ones responsible for how the GOP as a whole acted But now it’s group think?Nope nothing changed the GOP is still more than capable of group think just cause they have 5 members who on one single occasions demonstration a hint of independent thought I think we’re sort of going in circles now. :)We arent, but I can see why you might think that :)@georgetakei
(DIR) Post #AZyeG5Wk6MZOc9UenY by freemo@qoto.org
2023-09-21T02:00:02Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@JonKramer @pyranoseAhh you meant he didnt support one specific draft bill for health care that would have been hugely damaging while he supported other universal healthcare bills he felt were better structured.Ok fair. Thankfully in opposing that particular bill (I do remember it) was a really smart move.Also considering his history for supporting, pushing for, and having some successs, on universal health care. Its clear on this position he leans left.@georgetakei
(DIR) Post #AZyeLTWcIyvUUU0GyO by JonKramer@qoto.org
2023-09-21T02:01:03Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@freemo @pyranose @georgetakei what form of universal healthcare has Biden (or Obama) ever supported?
(DIR) Post #AZyeNhoo8LTTOrZkUC by ceoln@qoto.org
2023-09-21T02:01:27Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@freemoOkay. :) Maybe it’s that you tend to focus on small specifics, and I am more out in the generalities.The people who voted against that rule (because the bill didn’t cut enough) are a subset of the people who are threatening to remove McCarthy if he puts forward a bill that might pass with D votes. And those two things are part of the same crazy swing of the GOP to the right and to obstructionism.I guess there is a sense in which the votes against the rule were “independent thought”, and the pressure on McCarthy not to compromise an inch is “group think”. I just don’t find it a very interesting sense, I guess, since I see both things as part of the same overall phenomenon, being done by the same basic group of people.@georgetakei
(DIR) Post #AZyevABBi1i8urzuJU by ceoln@qoto.org
2023-09-21T02:07:30Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@freemoYou have very selectively quoted from the OP there. :) It was about more than just that one sentence.And lol, I guess there is a sense in which their independence “resulted in good happening”, but it’s an awfully silly sense. And it’s not like if that rule had passed the bill would have ultimately passed; this is just political theater and power plays within the GOP, so the defeat of the rule did a very minimal amount of good.I think it’s much more significant that their “independence” was in the direction of evil, even if it did block a slightly bad thing (for not being evil enough). I don’t think this is evidence for this particular kind of “independence” being a good thing.I think we do have a fundamental disagreement there, but I doubt we’ll convince each other either way.@georgetakei
(DIR) Post #AZyg1eAdDSAHciOPwG by freemo@qoto.org
2023-09-21T02:19:49Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@ceolnYou keep paraphrasing what i say, and injecting words (seemingly intentionally) that complete change what I said and then discuss what i didnt say rather than what I said. In fact the word you inserted in the very last post I had pointed out was erroneous and not what I was saying.. and we go inserting a similar various in your paraphrasing again I disagree that there is anything good about dissenting from an immoral party in an even more immoral direction.Now look at what your responding to. You have now added the word “extreme” twice despite me objecting to the description of these 5 people as extreme for voting in line with democrats. I am saying it is a quality we want in republicans as a whole however. Because groupthink means they follow a immoral party, and without dissent no change occurs.If it is the whole of the republican party then how is it “even more immoral” direction? Presumably some members will be above the average morality, others below.I also quite explicitly correct your use of “extreme” and point out that is not what im arguing… yet this new variations adds it back. Simply causing trouble does not cause the party to have mechanisms for change and dissent in any significant sense.I didnt argue for “simply causing trouble”, I argued for independent thought. So now we are back to these 5 GOP voting the same way as dems is “simply causing trouble” and not good, buyt the 200+ dems who voted that way due to groupthink, those guys arent?Describing a vote that stopped a bad bill from passing, that you agree is a bad bill, and woul have passed if they didnt is “simply causing trouble”… sorry but your biases are showing. I don’t recall you objecting to the word “extreme” before.I quoted where I said it above.. but no big deal, I suspect it isnt intentional but subconscious, just kinda annoying And in any case, they are extreme.Whether they are extreme or not doesnt matter. I have made no claims as to how moderate they may be, nor did I praise this quality of them in any way. I will never understand why people on the far left will constantly go off topic to talk about bad qualities of the GOP that have no relefvance to the point being made (that independent thought is one among a collection of properties neccesary to make a good politician).I think people on the left just really struggle with discussing the part seperate fromt he whole. They just cant accept having a conversation that admits anything remotely good, however valid, about a person who is overwhelming evil.That said I guess the right isnt usually that much better with this They voted with the Democrats not because they agree with them that the bill cuts too much; they voted against the bill (actually against the rule to allow the bill to advance) because they didn’t think it cut enough. They’re extreme.Ok, but I never said they were good people or extremism was a desirable quality… so again how does thiws even have relevance. And no, the discussion thread is not only about one particular rule vote on one particular defense appropriations bill. But I doubt I’m going to convince you of that.You can of course discuss related matters, Im not trying to say you arent allowed to do that… But again we made it very clear that we are remarked about a single action (independence) taken on a single vote, and how that action, as a general concept, is one of a collection of properties that a good politician needs.So sure, you can spend all the time you want arguing about cause and effect and other bills and other votes that may have effected it.. but to what end? No one defended the GOP as desirable good people, so your just wasting your breath arguing about something that isnt what anyone is saying or asserting@georgetakei
(DIR) Post #AZyhV8gIxLhgbSpnmK by freemo@qoto.org
2023-09-21T02:36:21Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@JonKramer I would say that you being in the thick of the forest your sight is blinded by the trees. As for selective eye sight, we all suffer from that. No exceptions to that rule.I would argue quite the opposite. As someone who has spent his whole live living around the world, often moving from country to country every half a year or year or so… someone who has experienced, been a resident, dealt witht he healthcare and the taxes and almost every aspect of living, and done this in a vast array of different countries in different regions… if anything this gives a perspective outside “the forest” and makes my eyesight less selective.In fact I’d say you, as someone I presume has mostly only ever lived in one country (or one region like europe) and has only ever heard one countries echo chamber and lived it… you ont eh other hand are more likely to be stuck int he forrest with selective vision so to speak.That said im not saying I have no bias, clearly i have plenty, just as we all do. What I am saying is that of the two of us, given our expiernce, I am less likely to be indoctrinated to this stuff. No, I don’t think to be left you have to be anti large company. I would suggest not being anti large company is a common feature for the right though.Something being a common property of the left or the right does not make it a proper of the left or the right, nor does beleiving it change where you are on the scale.Generally the right is older and the left is younger. That doesnt mean I can argue that two people with identical opinions on policy the younger one leans more left than the older one.I think you are confusing the DNC and GOP with left vs right. There are quite a few things people on either side tend to sharein common that has nothing to do with defining that side. I would say being in favor of corporate government enforced monopolies is a strong indication you are pretty far right wing.I know what monopolies are… I know how lack of monopoly laws has a tendency to result in monopolies forming… but how do you “enforce monopolies” I have never heard of someone in the GOP actively forcing the creation of a monopoly by .. what… forcing smaller companies to merge until they become a monopoly…. I dont even know what this means.That said I do agree that the left will generally be anti-monopoly, and the right tends to not care so much about monopolies. But just to be clear a monopoly is not a large company, and even when companies become megalarge that doesnt necceseraly mean its a monopoly. A monopoly is only tangentally related to the size of the company. I would also argue that ‘unregulated businesses is not a right wing positionYes. Loosely speaking i would say the right is about individual/entity freedom, and the left focuses on collective welfare. This generally means the right prefers to put as few limitations on people and businesses as possible (unregulated) while the left usually forces (regulates) the individual to act for the greater good even if it harms them as an individual to do so. The right loves mountains of regulations that support their major donors, and inhibit competition.Not really. I mean yea they are corrupt just like the democrats and will take pay to do things that help their corperate buddies, sure.. this is corruption and its on both sides. But in terms of policy they tend to be far less heavy on regulating their donors competition than the democrats would be willing to. That privatize profits, while socializing costs like pollution.Witht he right focusing on individual freedoms and the left focusing on collective welfare then yea. Naturally the right is going to care more about an individuals right to do things that may cause pollution than they will care about the pollution, I’d agree with that.@Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei
(DIR) Post #AZyhygQMa1UheXSwHA by freemo@qoto.org
2023-09-21T02:41:43Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@ceoln It seems at this point that we just think about things too differently to make much progress in this discussion; you will remain convinced that I am doing mental gymnastics around a relatively simple situation, and I will remain convinced that you are focusing on one simple aspect of a much more complex situation.That isnt how it seems to me. In fact, as far as I can tell we think alike and we have been agreeing the whole time but your fabricating things to argue about that I am not saying…You seem to focus on if the GOP or those 5 people are good people and nuances of the situation pointing out that the GOP is shit….Meanwhile im here making no claims remotely resembling any of that and simply pointing out how these bad people exhibit one single property that is a good property in a sea of shit.Meanwhile you keep focusing on the sea of shit, which we both agree on, rather than what is really being discussed which is if independent thought is a desirable trait in a good politician.So yea seems we even disagree on why we disagree. While i actually think we agree and your going down tangents, you think we are arguing about something ive said like 10 times ive agreed with you on….@georgetakei
(DIR) Post #AZyi3FIKsGE6xat1YO by freemo@qoto.org
2023-09-21T02:42:33Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@JonKramer @pyranose @georgetakei you may disagree that I provided more than one example, and that’s OK, you have every right to be wrong.Thats not what I said. I said you provided about 5 examples… 4 had nothing to do with left-right dynamics, one did.
(DIR) Post #AZyiFaf9Fq1YhsRXou by JonKramer@qoto.org
2023-09-21T02:44:48Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@freemo @Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei“I think you are confusing the DNC and GOP with left vs right.”Nope, I am saying they are both right wing. And posted a link that I agree with, that shows they are testibly both right wing.“how do you “enforce monopolies” “Pretty easy. Licencing.“Witht he right focusing on individual freedoms and the left focusing on collective welfare then yea.”The right stands firmly against individual freedoms. They are against body autonomy, and that is the very foundation of individual freedom. If you don’t own yourself, and have the right to do what you want with your own body, you have no basic freedoms. And, I would say the ‘left’ in America is not far separated from the ‘right.’ Because there is no left wing in America.
(DIR) Post #AZyiGLXexUxc6GIjAm by ceoln@qoto.org
2023-09-21T01:38:34Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@freemo(Surely you do, at least, grant that voting against a bad bill because it wasn’t bad enough, is not praiseworthy? Sorry, I can’t help asking…)@georgetakei
(DIR) Post #AZyiGMGKHQgoKnCOnI by freemo@qoto.org
2023-09-21T02:44:54Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@ceoln Surely you do, at least, grant that voting against a bad bill because it wasn’t bad enough, is not praiseworthy? Sorry, I can’t help asking…I have never met a politician whose motives were praiseworthy…Actually I take that back, I can think of one. Bernie. Problem is while his intentions are good, he doesnt have the first clue about how things actually work and his proposed solutions, while well meaning, would probably we worse than just nuking ourselves.To be clear, their motivations werent praiseworthy, them as people arent praise worthy.All they did was show a single desirable property among a see of human shit.@georgetakei
(DIR) Post #AZyizTUCGkiHlmCTEe by freemo@qoto.org
2023-09-21T02:53:03Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@JonKramerThe ACA’s stated goal when Obama pushed for it was universal healthcare. In the form originally proposed it would have been true universal healthcare. Sadly after it got revised by the senate to be able to pass both parties the revised form fell short of actually providing universal healthcare. but it is quite clear Obama proposed and supported it, he just didnt have the power to get it through in that form.@pyranose @georgetakei
(DIR) Post #AZyjrkPFZnBFsslXCi by freemo@qoto.org
2023-09-21T03:02:52Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@ceoln Okay. :) Maybe it’s that you tend to focus on small specifics, and I am more out in the generalities.Actually I was kinda thinking the opposite lol.While im focusing on the general idea of independent thought as a desire quality among many in a good politician… you seem to be focused on these specific politicians and if they are good people simply because they were the example that initiated the thought. The people who voted against that rule (because the bill didn’t cut enough) are a subset of the people who are threatening to remove McCarthy if he puts forward a bill that might pass with D votes.Yes an extremely small subset (5 people out of 210+) And those two things are part of the same crazy swing of the GOP to the right and to obstructionism.You tried to use the fact that I said 5 people out of 210+ were independent thinkers against me when I said something all 210 people did was an act of group think.Do you not realize that 5 people can act independently as part of a group of 210+ people who act according to group think? Do you also not realize why it seems quite strange when you objected to the fact that I pointed that out? I guess there is a sense in which the votes against the rule were “independent thought”, and the pressure on McCarthy not to compromise an inch is “group think”That too… the group overall will act in group think because thats still pretty common in the GOP (despite being slightly less than in the dems). So there will be plenty of examples of group think for the GOP as a whole even when a small number might dissent from time to time.but also the fact that im not implying everyone is independent all the time. Even these 5 people who were indepdent in this one case I’m sure will tow the link the majority of the time. They are just slightly more capable of being independent some of the time, thats all. I just don’t find it a very interesting sense, I guess, since I see both things as part of the same overall phenomenon, being done by the same basic group of people.Thats because your still focused on the specific (these people and if their good people or whatever) rather than the general “is individual thought a desirable trait in a politician who has all the other desirable traits a politician should also have”@georgetakei
(DIR) Post #AZylQxkw2AfFNSGSGG by freemo@qoto.org
2023-09-21T03:20:26Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@ceoln You have very selectively quoted from the OP there. :) It was about more than just that one sentence.I did, but nothing else in the OP did I disagree with… so then what were you arguing for?You responded to my comment, not the op. My comment was about that single vote, and a very specific aspect of that vote (independent thought) and nothing else.. everything in my comment was about “it”.Obviously if you wanted to comment on the other stuff you could. But since it was never in question im not sure why you argued with me about it as if it was when im just sitting here not even disagreeing with you on any of that. And lol, I guess there is a sense in which their independence “resulted in good happening”, but it’s an awfully silly sense.Nothing silly about it at all… I mean really just think about it if no one ever dissented, and one party had a majority in both houses, and everyone on both sides followed party lines, what would you have? several years of absolute GOP dictatorship. Anything the GOP proposed would always pass, no exceptions.Thats the case in the house right now, it has a GOP majority. If no one was an indepent thinking the bill failing would have not been possible at all.Literally independent thought is the only reason this bill got block from passing through the house. If it werent for independent thought your only hope would be a veto from biden… if Trump were in office even then no hope. this is just political theater and power plays within the GOP, so the defeat of the rule did a very minimal amount of good.Glad to hear we agree it did good, however small. QED I think it’s much more significant that their “independence” was in the direction of evil, even if it did block a slightly bad thing (for not being evil enough). I don’t think this is evidence for this particular kind of “independence” being a good thing.This is dishonest wording to push your agenda again…It wasnt “in the direction of evil” you literally just admitted it did good, not evil, ergo it was the opposite, in the direction of good. Stopping something that is bad, is not in the direction of evil.What i suspect you mean is something more like “I think it is much more significant that they have evil motives than the fact that they did a good deed while carrying out those motives”. And while I would agree with you that is true if we were sitting here having a discussion about the overall state of our government. But that isnt what the discussion is about, its about if independent thought is a desirable quality in a good politician. In that regard their personal motives are not at all significant because we arent discussing them as individuals, we are discussing one property they demonstrated once. I think we do have a fundamental disagreement there, but I doubt we’ll convince each other either way.Still kinda sounds to me like we agree and your just arguing something completely unrelated to the one point I am discussing.@georgetakei
(DIR) Post #AZymWljXkJUhmXwhkm by freemo@qoto.org
2023-09-21T03:32:41Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@JonKramer Nope, I am saying they are both right wing. And posted a link that I agree with, that shows they are testibly both right wing.Yes that much is clear. That is also not the comment you made where i said you seemed to be confusing the two. Pretty easy. Licencing.Ok so what act of licening did Obama carry out that explicitly forced the creation of a monopoly? The right stands firmly against individual freedoms.yea, no. They are against body autonomyMostly no, though there are always exceptions from individual members.For example on abortion (I am pro abortion myself).. the right usually focuses on preserving the bodily autonomy of BOTH the mother and the baby. Some go so far as to only care about the bodily autonomy of the baby by completely outlawing abortions. Others care about both by proposing extremely narrow abortion windows that garuntee the woman still has a right to abortion early on, but once nerves and braincells form in the baby that its own self-determination is also honored. Generally the left cares only about the mothers bodily autonomy and is perfectly fine violating the babies right to self-determination. They do this for the “greater good” because otherwise it would harm our communities and mothers. Meanwhile the right doesnt care too much about the community or the reprocussions so long as both the mother and childs life is protected.Another example of bodily autonomy is vaccines, while the right generally sided strongly with personal freedom and allowing people to have the right to choose if they want to vaccinated or not, the left went the other way and sided with collective welfare and prefred to support vaccine passports, getting fired from jobs, and being denied service, all grossly intrustive to the individual forcing us to make public part of our medical history effectively. It is clear on this issue again the right sided with individual rights and freedoms while the left focused on collective welfare.Even on issues of Drug use the right has focused more on personal freedom of late than the left. While Biden explicitly stated he would not legalize cannavis Trump claimed to support its legalization. While he never legalized it he did pass the farm bill which comes pretty damn close (its now legal in america to order psychadelic cannabis products across the whole country, though still with some restrictions). And, I would say the ‘left’ in America is not far separated from the ‘right.’ Because there is no left wing in America.Well as established this is wrong, per the thread.@Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei
(DIR) Post #AZyo2fu93NIyvNgNZg by ceoln@qoto.org
2023-09-21T03:49:42Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@freemoThere was no indication whatever in your comment that it was entirely about that one sentence in the OP, and not about everything else the OP said. But okay.Their independence even on that one vote was in the direction of evil, in the sense that they voted against the rule because it did not make enough cuts. The ultimate effect of that attitude is most likely to be negative, even if it had a small positive effect in this one specify case. The larger impact is the more important.I don’t think we agree, in that you think (or you have said things that I interpret to mean) that independent thought is a good thing even in bad people; that a bad person who is an independent thinker is better than a bad person who isn’t. I don’t believe that, myself.If the discussion were only about whether independent thought is a good quality in a good person, then we would have no disagreement. But that is not what your comment said. If that’s what you intended to say, then fine! :)@georgetakei
(DIR) Post #AZyohc4AEHM2tPtDYO by ceoln@qoto.org
2023-09-21T03:57:05Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@freemoIt is not 210+ Republicans who are threatening to remove McCarthy if he puts forward anything that will pass with Democratic votes. It is a specific nasty subset of the house GOP, and the votes of those 5 members on the Defense appropriations bill rule were part of the same overall movement. Describing the one as “independent thinking” and the other as “group think”, when in fact they are part of exactly the same overall phenomenon, is not IMHO useful. They are not two distinct and different things; they are two visible symptoms of the same underlying thing.@georgetakei
(DIR) Post #AZyp0dEY73Ce12oevY by freemo@qoto.org
2023-09-21T04:00:29Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@ceoln There was no indication whatever in your comment that it was entirely about that one sentence in the OP, and not about everything else the OP said. But okay.Originally in my first comment i didnt explicitly state that. But my comment only stated that while the GOP was a piece of shit and i in no way give them praise, that this one property, independent thought, is something the Dems could stand to adopt rather than attack.I made no attempt to address any other aspect of the post, which should have been the hintThat said as you continued to try to push to the other aspects of the post I did many many times try to make it clear what I was discussing.That said, the fact that you didnt understand that was the point is understandable, miscommunications sometimes happen (even if something is said more than once), and thats ok. Not going to hold it against you. Just glad that that is clarified now. Their independence even on that one vote was in the direction of evil, in the sense that they voted against the rule because it did not make enough cuts.“because it” that is intent, not direction… The “because” for something is your reason, the desired effect. It is not the direction, the actual effect the action is headed in… which we both agreed was positive (blocking the bill) The ultimate effect of that attitude is most likely to be negative, even if it had a small positive effect in this one specify case. The larger impact is the more important.Well “attitude” is intent. I never claimed anything about their intent or if that intent would ultimately lead to good or bad… Again we are talking action, and actual results..So yea their intent, i agree, likely long term will have largely negative effects.But their action, which only came about due to their willingness for independent action, was positive, regardless of what effects other things that were not their action (like their intent) might have. I don’t think we agree, in that you think (or you have said things that I interpret to mean) that independent thought is a good thing even in bad people; that a bad person who is an independent thinker is better than a bad person who isn’t. I don’t believe that, myself.No i did not say independent thought in a bad person is a good thing… i choose my words very carefully, ever word i pick is very important when i say things like that.What I said was that independent thought in the context of a group which one elects to be a part of, is a good quality to have. I stated this is because bad people will elect to join groups of other bad people. So independent thought gives the possiblity of change where group think garuntees exclusvely evil behavior.I also pointed out independent thought in an evil person will result in evil actions regardless of if their in a group or not. So while it has the advantaged of opening up to the possibility of change, it will not produce a better person on its own. However when combined with other good qualities like morality, it will.@georgetakei
(DIR) Post #AZyp94wayCC2H6Rigy by freemo@qoto.org
2023-09-21T04:02:02Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@ceoln It is not 210+ Republicans who are threatening to remove McCarthy if he puts forward anything that will pass with Democratic votes. It is a specific nasty subset of the house GOP, and the votes of those 5 members on the Defense appropriations bill rule were part of the same overall movement.Thats fair, you’d have to quantify the actual number… but either way this is pretty irrelevant to my point and simply a tangent anyway.@georgetakei
(DIR) Post #AZypuXey1VlswfphJ2 by ceoln@qoto.org
2023-09-21T04:10:38Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@freemo“If it werent for independent thought your only hope would be a veto from biden…”Also no. This wasn’t a vote to pass the bill, it was just a rule vote to advance it toward consideration. The bill would still have to have survived amendment, passed an actual vote, gone through reconciliation, and so on.
(DIR) Post #AZz2pblybQ2ver5abI by freemo@qoto.org
2023-09-21T06:35:20Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@ceoln Also no. This wasn’t a vote to pass the bill, it was just a rule vote to advance it toward consideration. The bill would still have to have survived amendment, passed an actual vote, gone through reconciliation, and so on.I didnt say it was a vote to pass the bill, you missed my point.I said if there was no independent thought… this means we are talking about a scenario where on Every vote democrats vote against GOP bills and GOP votes for… no exception.Since (though you left out) in my quote i specifically talked about a scenario where there is a GOP majority, that means it would have been garunteed to pass every single one of those stages you listedThat means the rule to advance it forward would have been a garunteed passthat means no matter what amendments are added, passThat means the actual vote garunteed pass…reconcilation, garunteed pass.As I said literally the only way it couldnt pass would be either if the GOP lost majority, or if some people fromt he party dissent. Independent thought would literally be required if there was even a chance to stop such an evil bill.
(DIR) Post #AZzrFw5EVVvanxuQoi by JonKramer@qoto.org
2023-09-21T16:00:23Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@freemo @Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei“Ok so what act of licening did Obama carry out that explicitly forced the creation..”Not sure he did create a monopoly, although I assume his administration oversaw the creation of a few. But without any doubt he continued the policies for existing monopolies, in the oil and gas industry, cable TV, internet service providers, pharmaceuticals, auto manufacturers, insurance companies (that is a HUGH one under Obama) and literally thousands of other monopolies licensed by the state.“the right usually focuses on preserving the bodily autonomy of BOTH the mother and the baby.”If you have an abortion ban that says you can not remove a dead fetus from a mother, then you do not care about the body autonomy of the mother. Google up “abortion ban dead fetus” for examples where this is undeniably true. The right doesn’t care about body autonomy. If they did, they would support drug use, prostitution, abortion, trans gender surgery, etc. And ‘the left’ doesn’t support those things either. Which to me indicates that ‘the left’ is almost as far right as ‘the right.’ As for vaccines, I think American history is full of forced vaccines. The 1st forced vaccines were done by George Washington (innoculations). We have had vaccine passports since about WW I. Every school kid in public school has needed one since about 1950, Public health isn’t a left or right issue, and there have always been ways to bypass vaccines.“Well as established this is wrong, per the thread.”Repetition is not proof. When the BLM candidates control even 25% of the government, when the Rent is Too Damn High Party has even NYC, when The ANTIFA party has 100 congressmen, and 30 senators… then their MIGHT be a left wing in this country. Right now we have the theocratic right, and the Senator from a credit card company.
(DIR) Post #AZztuMiN70KctMcd6W by freemo@qoto.org
2023-09-21T16:30:07Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
@JonKramer Not sure he did create a monopolyOk then this wasnt even a valid point then. although I assume his administration oversaw the creation of a few. But without any doubt he continued the policies for existing monopolies, in the oil and gas industry, cable TV, internet service providers, pharmaceuticals, auto manufacturers, insurance companies (that is a HUGH one under Obama) and literally thousands of other monopolies licensed by the state.He isnt a dictator, he doesnt get to dictate the state of things. He can, at best, suggest a bill (this is rare), and he can veto bills, thats it.. You act like he can go in and change anything to whatever he wants… it doesnt work that way.So all we can do if we are honestly evaluate if he is left or right, is not to look at the things he never had a decision to make on at all.. we look on the votes he did make the actions he did. This nonsense of “everything wasnt perfect when he left so he is right wing for not fixing everything” is so beyond absurd… If you have an abortion ban that says you can not remove a dead fetus from a mother, then you do not care about the body autonomy of the mother.On this I agree, then you dont care.. however that is not the stance of the right as a whole, so you are just blowing hot air on that one. While they are generally against abortion, sure, but whether or not they can abort a dead fetus is not a left or right idea specifically. Google up “abortion ban dead fetus” for examples where this is undeniably true.I just searched it… what I found was that an overwhelming majority (66%) of the GOP beleive abortion should be legal under extenuating circumstances such as a dead fetus, risk to the mother, rape, etc.So yea thanks, the search confirmed this is not a majority held property of those on the right. More importantly it wouldnt be objectively either per my above comments. The right doesn’t care about body autonomy.Seeing as you encouraged me to look it up and the actual data confirmed perfectly the scenario I said and debunked your own… seems this is clearly proven to be false if we are judging them based on their policy stance. If they did, they would support drug use, prostitution, abortion, trans gender surgery, etc.Well as covered earlier they actually do support drug use, more so then the left anyway. While Biden actively said he would not legalize marijuana Trump said he would… and while Trump didnt fully achieve it he came pretty damn close with the Farm Bill passed.Abortion we already covered too.Prostitution I agree is a right-wing policy stance. The GOP, while being mostly right wing, is not synonymous with the right wing. On most issues they pick a right-wing stance on very few they pick a left-wing… this is one of the few the GOP picks a left wing stance by not supporting it. And ‘the left’ doesn’t support those things either. Which to me indicates that ‘the left’ is almost as far right as ‘the right.’No you mean the DNC doesnt support it. the DNC is not the same as the left even though they as a party are on the left (a person can be on the left and hold some non-left view so long as the aggregate is clearly left). When you go down the policy list of the DNC 98% of it is all on the left, 2% might be right wing ideas…. most of the policy stance however is not a right or left principle and denotes a different metric (like authoritarianism, which is independent of left or right) s for vaccines, I think American history is full of forced vaccines. The 1st forced vaccines were done by George Washington (innoculations). We have had vaccine passports since about WW I. Every school kid in public school has needed one since about 1950, Public health isn’t a left or right issue, and there have always been ways to bypass vaccines.This doesnt even address what was said… Whether forcing people to take a drug is common and has been done before has absolutely no relevance on if it is a left or right wing principle… To argue its been the normal since forever as some twisted argument that it is left or right wing is just nonsensical and does nothing to advance that point.Being against forced drugging of people (personal freedom) is a right wing principle… force drugging people for the greater good is a left wing principle. The fact that it has been done before and isnt new has no bearing on that. Repetition is not proof.I agree, and what you responded to was not me repeating myself, so also not relevant. I had pointed to the fact this was already proven and evidence laid out earlier in the same message.. that is not repetition, that is avoiding repetition and refering you to the original proof instead. When the BLM candidates control even 25% of the government, when the Rent is Too Damn High Party has even NYC, when The ANTIFA party has 100 congressmen, and 30 senators… then their MIGHT be a left wing in this country. Right now we have the theocratic right, and the Senator from a credit card company.Yea this is also really disconnected from what is being discussed… we arent saying the country is a left-wing country… we are saying Obama and Biden were left wing… huge difference. It amazed me you cant see how poorly your arguing your point… like somehow the entire country having high rent or somethign proves Obama and Biden werent left wing…. i almost sprained my muscled rolling my eyes on this one.@Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei
(DIR) Post #AZzv9nqAdoExJqC9J2 by JonKramer@qoto.org
2023-09-21T16:44:07Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@freemo @Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei“He isnt a dictator”Research what an executive order is, and how it works. This doesn’t mean he is a dictator, and I never said or implied he was.“majority (66%) of the GOP beleive”I am talking the party, not individuals.“Well as covered earlier they actually do support drug use”There are several million young black men in prison who will be happy to hear of this policy change.“No you mean the DNC doesnt support it”Correct. The Dems are a right wing party. Individual members of the party can be far more liberal.“When you go down the policy list of the DNC 98% of it is all on the left”Is pro war a liberal policy? Increasing the police force? Border patrols? Crime bills? Give me an example of something the DO, not something they vaguely talk about. Show me that they are willing to fight for those things, and not just give lip service to perpetuate political theater.“Whether forcing people to take a drug is common and has been done before has absolutely no relevance”The relevance is that all sides of the issue agree in principle with some level of force to protect the public health. Neither side mandates it though, or pushes for absolute mandates.“Yea this is also really disconnected from what is being discussed”We are discussing the existence of left wing parties in America. I gave example that would show their existence. Examples that do not exist. Because, there is no left wing party in America.“we are saying Obama and Biden were left wing… huge difference”No, YOU are saying that. I say they are demonstrably right wing.
(DIR) Post #AZzvF8qdxkIDv9xhUu by JonKramer@qoto.org
2023-09-21T16:45:06Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@freemo @Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei“like somehow the entire country having high rent or somethign proves”I never made that argument.
(DIR) Post #Aa01nleGoFKXpT4IsK by freemo@qoto.org
2023-09-21T17:58:30Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
@JonKramer Research what an executive order is, and how it works. This doesn’t mean he is a dictator, and I never said or implied he was.I am very well aware of what an executive order is.They are not legally binding, they are only commands by the president. While people who directly treat him as a boss are expected to follow it, they can not be used to pass laws, pass regulations, or dictate anything to any independent body (like the FDA, FCC, etc)… he can issue them, but they are at best suggestions.It is also highly irresponsible and abusive to issue them beyond routine administrative issues, despite the fact that they have been abused this way recently.Regardless as you point out, this doesnt change the equation, he isnt a dictator. I am talking the party, not individuals.What does this even mean… The individuals who make up the party ARE the party.. unless you mean the party manifesto itself, which also does not state that abortion of dead fetuses must be illegal as a party stance. There are several million young black men in prison who will be happy to hear of this policy change.Yes, sadly what they did was still illegal. Thankfully Obama pardoned a HUGE number of this group specifically for these reasons. Correct. The Dems are a right wing party. Individual members of the party can be far more liberal.Nope, but good to hear you meant the dems and not the left and understand they arent the same. Is pro war a liberal policy?Pro war is not a left or right wing principle, That exists on a different metric (authoritarianism, as does fascism) Increasing the police force?Increasing the police force would be a left-wing policy stance because it is an attempt at addressing the public welfare by protected against crime… Of course the fact our police force is evil throws a wrench in that, but that isnt Obama’s or Biden’s choice to make them evil. But yea as a general principle investing in community security would be a left-wing principle, while pushing to make the police for less oppressive to the individual would be a right-wing principle. Border patrols?This bring up an interesting point that wasnt addressed that is important. The GOP cares about individual freedom even if its contrary to community welfare, as I said, but to be more specific “individual freedom of american citizens”So stronger borders would be a right-wing policy because it is an attempt to favor current citizens welfare by excluding foreigners to the USA where we would have to share our resources.Soi yea border patrols is clearly a right wing policy since it is designed to protect existing individuals in america over the community welfare of the other countries or world. Crime bills?That would depend specifically on the content of the bill. Give me an example of something the DO, not something they vaguely talk about.Earlier in the thread (though im not sure you were tagged) I listed about a total of 20 specific things Obama and Biden have either voted on, or introduced that are clear left-wing stances Show me that they are willing to fight for those things, and not just give lip service to perpetuate political theater.Yea I did that throught the thread as mentioned The relevance is that all sides of the issue agree in principle with some level of force to protect the public health. Neither side mandates it though, or pushes for absolute mandates.What is left or right wing has nothing to do with what policies someone in the RNC or DNC follow… Yopu can not say “most people on the left hold these principles, therefore its a principle of the left” and then use that to define what hte left and right is.The left and right is defined… if people who consider themselves on the left follow that definition strictly vs looslyso all that means is when the DNC and the GOP agree on something it is one of three things 1) An issue that is neither left or right wing in nature 2) a left-wing ideology the GOP adopted 3) a right wing ideology the DNC adopted. We are discussing the existence of left wing parties in America. I gave example that would show their existence. Examples that do not exist. Because, there is no left wing party in America.Which is exactly why your wrong. This is an invalid logical fallacy called the fallacy of composition. You can not assume that the parts must have the same properties as the whole.In this sense the “whole” is “left-wing ideology” (or right) and the “part” is “someone who is on the left”.. A liberal who is part of the left wing does not need to adopt the infinite number of potential left wing policies in the whole of the universe in order to qualify as being part of the left-wing. No, YOU are saying that. I say they are demonstrably right wing.Yes what i meant by that is “this is what we are debating” you debating the opposite… and in this particular quote you were failing to argue the point.@Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei
(DIR) Post #Aa01ztaN7p2Nv91oCe by freemo@qoto.org
2023-09-21T18:00:44Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@JonKramer I never made that argument.You said: …when the Rent is Too Damn High Party has even NYC… then their MIGHT be a left wing in this countrySo yea you implied that the rent being too damn high, and it not being addressed the way you want it to be, is somehow an argument in this thread where you are arguing that no (or at least almost no) left wing candidates exist.This was absurd.@Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei
(DIR) Post #Aa07DsgblWMyxLQvCK by ech@qoto.org
2023-09-21T18:59:19Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@freemo @JonKramer @Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei I do not want to weigh in on what counts as “left” or “right”, but just what is this: “(66%) of the GOP beleive abortion should be legal under extenuating circumstances such as a dead fetus” – no! Pretty much absolutely nobody wants to ban whatever surgery is indicated for miscarriages/etc. Yikes!This reminds me of something. Awhile ago, there was a poorly-worded bill in CA that righties were saying was going to legalize infanticide. When this was pointed out, it was immediately fixed of course to clarify that it didn’t do that. But this didn’t stop some people from continuing to scaremonger about CA democrats wanting to kill children or whatever. That scaremongering is absurd, and a ridiculous thing to do.Spreading this idea that republicans want to force women to carry dead fetuses is equally asinine. You all should stop doing it.
(DIR) Post #Aa07kYclNP6kI7DSU4 by freemo@qoto.org
2023-09-21T19:05:12Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@ech I do not want to weigh in on what counts as “left” or “right”, but just what is this: “(66%) of the GOP beleive abortion should be legal under extenuating circumstances such as a dead fetus” – no! Pretty much absolutely nobody wants to ban whatever surgery is indicated for miscarriages/etc. Yikes!I dont still have it in front me.. but only 4% of the GOP support banning abortions even when the mothers life is at risk or a miscarriage. 66% think abortion should only be allowed with extenuating circumstances… the rest think abortion should be allowed in all circumstances. This reminds me of something. Awhile ago, there was a poorly-worded bill in CA that righties were saying was going to legalize infanticide. When this was pointed out, it was immediately fixed of course to clarify that it didn’t do that. But this didn’t stop some people from continuing to scaremonger about CA democrats wanting to kill children or whatever. That scaremongering is absurd, and a ridiculous thing to do.The one thing i realize is that people feel a *need to misrepresent the facts… almost with everything they have an opinion on… its almost like any nuanced opinion is the same as being the evil guys on the other side…. its tiring and infantile.@JonKramer @Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei
(DIR) Post #Aa09UbWL2XOgY6jQ1Y by JonKramer@qoto.org
2023-09-21T19:24:46Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@freemo @Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei The Rent is Too Damn High is the name of a left wing political party.
(DIR) Post #Aa09Z8wciEO7N0BsVU by JonKramer@qoto.org
2023-09-21T19:25:35Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@freemo @ech @Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei what does THE PARTY, and in specific, the party leaders push?
(DIR) Post #Aa0BmbmiznggUQ6oro by freemo@qoto.org
2023-09-21T19:50:23Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@JonKramer Yes, one whose main focus is addressing the issue of the rent being too high (and other matters)... and thus my point@Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei
(DIR) Post #Aa0BuXz90TxZ1PhgX2 by freemo@qoto.org
2023-09-21T19:51:49Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@JonKramer 66% of "THE PARTY" and its leaders, pushes for exceptions to abortion. 4% push for abortion being illegal under all circumstances... Thereis virtually no support across the whole or aggregate of the GOP to force women to carry dead babies.@ech @Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei
(DIR) Post #Aa0BxlcMmGZmAgaJnM by JonKramer@qoto.org
2023-09-21T19:34:11Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@freemo @Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rent_Is_Too_Damn_High_Party
(DIR) Post #Aa0BxuVbilW7kKUY0e by freemo@qoto.org
2023-09-21T19:52:24Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@JonKramer Thanks, yes that confirms what i said earlier, it is a single issue party whose focus is on the rent being too high in NY.@Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei
(DIR) Post #Aa0CCryNQqKyE0573I by JonKramer@qoto.org
2023-09-21T19:55:08Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@freemo @Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei “like somehow the entire country having high rent or somethign proves”I never made that argument.
(DIR) Post #Aa0CNh3YMMArYMfDmK by freemo@qoto.org
2023-09-21T19:57:06Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@JonKramer No but you did make the argument that not having fringe politicial group in power whose sole purpose is to lower rent prices is an point supporting your argument here (which is about if Obama and Biden are left or right)@Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei
(DIR) Post #Aa0CW6mEcAU5doZlFw by JonKramer@qoto.org
2023-09-21T19:58:39Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@freemo @ech @Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei "and its leaders"That part isn't true. they support laws banning all abortions. The push for laws criminalizing women who would travel to other states to get a legal abortion. They require women to wait in parking lots until they are bleeding out before removing a dead fetus. In short, there is no argument that the leadership, leaders those 66% of the GOP members support, is in any way, shape or form in favor of body autonomy. By extension, if you vote for leaders who stand against body autonomy, YOU are against it. I see no grey here.
(DIR) Post #Aa0CeIYehHT0Uo85cO by JonKramer@qoto.org
2023-09-21T20:00:07Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@freemo @Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei My point was, and is, that there do exist some actual lefty parties. They are NOT in power. Only right wing parties have power in the United States. All left parties are out of power.
(DIR) Post #Aa0CnYDDrdNpeYW4u0 by JonKramer@qoto.org
2023-09-21T20:01:48Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@freemo @Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei That you consider an actual left party to be "fringe" is supporting of my position. The ARE fringe. Because they are actual lefties. Obama and Biden are not.
(DIR) Post #Aa0E4Av1p0TAHqUsrY by freemo@qoto.org
2023-09-21T20:15:59Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@JonKramer > That part isn't true. they support laws banning all abortions. A blatant lie you pulled out your butt there buddy... You just spewed that without ever fact checking it.Lets look at the real numbers:Currently there are 22 red states banning abortion. Of those 22 states **every single one of them** has an exception for having an abortion when you have a dead fetus. Although some of may be challenged in court and be in flux, in none of them is the life exception being challenged itself.In fact all 22 states go beyond this and allow exceptions on abortions when it threatens the life of the mother (which a dead fetus stuck in their whomb would qualify as).How about the leaders themselves? Well of the whole of the GOP there are only about 5 in all my hours of research I could find who said they would create an abortion ban with no life-exception.. and only one of those people (rubio) would I consider a party leader.> The push for laws criminalizing women who would travel to other states to get a legal abortion.Now you just moved the goal post... we are discussing the GOP's stance on abortion when a woman has a dead fetus... not traveling, we can address that seperately but first lets both agree your wrong about the nonsense you spewed earlier before we address other stuff you said.> In short, there is no argument that the leadership, leaders those 66% of the GOP members support, is in any way, shape or form in favor of body autonomy.Except for the fact that everything single thing you said to try to argue that point turned out to be a bald face lie without any basis in a reality, and that was shown by both what is actual law, and stated policy> By extension, if you vote for leaders who stand against body autonomy, YOU are against it. I see no grey here.Sure, luckily thats not the case here as per the above proof.@ech @Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei
(DIR) Post #Aa0EFSNvDvundsOKRc by freemo@qoto.org
2023-09-21T20:18:02Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@JonKramer > My point was, and is, that there do exist some actual lefty parties. They are NOT in power. Only right wing parties have power in the United States. All left parties are out of power.Seeing as all the evidence clearly showed the democrats are a left-wing party. Arguing some other left-wing party that is a joke and has no stance on any issue excpet one issue in one state, completely fails to make your point. An obscure non-functional left wing party not being elected but a different left wing party (DNC) being elected does nothing to advance your argument as to whether or not the DNC is left wing.@Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei
(DIR) Post #Aa0EMrHl2giKtg2O3s by freemo@qoto.org
2023-09-21T20:19:22Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@JonKramer > That you consider an actual left party to be "fringe" is supporting of my position. The ARE fringe. Because they are actual lefties. Obama and Biden are not.Jesus christ... no... they are fringe because they are a party that has no policy stance on anythign other than a single issue, rent, and in a single state, NYC... They are a joke of a party not because they are too left, but because they arent on the spectrum at all because they have no policy stance on anything other than one remote thing in one state.@Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei
(DIR) Post #Aa0ETADLZuVlLDysyG by JonKramer@qoto.org
2023-09-21T20:20:32Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@freemo @Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei "Seeing as all the evidence clearly showed the democrats are a left-wing party."Except it doesn't clearly show that. Let me know when they have ANY left wing stance at all, like BLM, ANTIFA, defund the police, end wars, UBI, open borders, body autonomy, etc. Or even the rent being too damn high.
(DIR) Post #Aa0Epdwthpdxvt0Qro by freemo@qoto.org
2023-09-21T20:24:33Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
@JonKramer ahh there you are making the Fallacy of Composition yet again... yea this is why its clear your in the wrong, you lay into fallacies and even when they are explained to you you just ignore it and keep repeating it....As stated, I listed over 20 specific votes and introduced bills by both Obama and Biden within the thread that are clearly left wing. So there is that but thats not the point.You just listed a bunch of left wing things you want to see.. your upset because all the ideals adopted by the left in the USA are moderate left ideals rather than the more extreme left ideals you demand... Just because they arent as extreme as you in their leftism doesnt make them right... A person on the left doesnt have to adopt every single fathomable left-wing idea anyone can favricate in order to be considering ont he left... thats just absurd... That said there have been a ton of left wing stuff they DO support, so the point has been very well proven.@Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei
(DIR) Post #Aa0EzYO5EqDZa0RoUC by JonKramer@qoto.org
2023-09-21T20:26:19Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@freemo @Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei "Clearly left wing".Those words don't mean what you think they mean. They may be clearly left wing to YOU. But to me, they are all pretty far right. Go back to my statement about forests and trees.
(DIR) Post #Aa0FDlFMDziFW48mhM by freemo@qoto.org
2023-09-21T20:28:55Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@JonKramer No they are **objectively** left wing to anyone who is objective and knowledgable in the matter.I do expect people who have strong biases (particularly those ont he extreme end of the spectrum) to think that though.@Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei
(DIR) Post #Aa0FUObJfsscCjLNZ2 by JonKramer@qoto.org
2023-09-21T20:31:57Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@freemo @Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei I think you don't understand the range of the political spectrum. I don't feel you CAN understand it. I think it is remarkably astute of you to understand that a left party is fringe at all, but fail to understand why.
(DIR) Post #Aa0G2jRKhauOgI2y5A by freemo@qoto.org
2023-09-21T20:38:08Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@JonKramer Your free to think that... and of course i would say your wrong.@Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei
(DIR) Post #Aa0GC4kUqRGlNOSwq0 by JonKramer@qoto.org
2023-09-21T20:39:51Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@freemo @Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei , just curious, where would you place Democratic socialists, actual socialists, and the communist party of America?
(DIR) Post #Aa0GvtlnzpOAe9vbo8 by JonKramer@qoto.org
2023-09-21T20:40:24Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@freemo @Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei , or the Green Party...
(DIR) Post #Aa0GvuTPNiGcpOKQls by freemo@qoto.org
2023-09-21T20:48:05Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
@JonKramer just curious, where would you placeSo keeping in mind the left isnt a single point in space… as a politicial spectrum its a bit like the real number line. There is a clear center dividing left and right in an absolute way, the 0.. but the left goes off into the negatives infinitely, and the right goes off into the positives infinitely.In other words just because two things are on the left doesnt mean they are anywhere near eachother in the extremity of their ideology. Something at -1 (slightly on the left) will not at represent something that is -1000 (extremely left) which in turn wont look much like anything at -1000000… I mean sure they may all match a core defintiion, but some may embrace that definition to a larger extreme… much as all those numbers are all negative numbers (and thus similar in one way) they are still very different numbers. Democratic socialistsleft actual socialistsleft communist partyleft or the Green Party…leftThat said they are all on very very different parts of the left spectrum and not at all near eachother on that spectrum, but still clearly in the left.More important on other political spectrum scales (such as authoritarianism) these ideologies vary greatly and arent on the same sides of many of those scales.@Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei
(DIR) Post #Aa0IANNenlgaUT6HWS by JonKramer@qoto.org
2023-09-21T21:01:57Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@freemo @Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakeiLooking at your number line… you see the Dems, Obama, and Biden as closer to the socialists, Greens, etc. than to the GOP? Really?? On a scale from 1-100, I see the GOP about 80. I see the dems about a 70. Dem socialists about 50, socialists about 20. Greens come in at about 30 maybe? Anything to the right of Saunders, at 50, is ‘right wing.’ Anything to the left of him is ‘left wing.’Your point about authoritarian vs libertarian… I addressed that in my initial post with a picture from political compass.
(DIR) Post #Aa0IeBjWfdED3RXqAy by freemo@qoto.org
2023-09-21T21:07:18Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
@JonKramer Looking at your number line… you see the Dems, Obama, and Biden as closer to the socialists, Greens, etc. than to the GOP? Really??Nope, lets use the analogy to show why.I am just going to pick arbitrary numbers they dont represent where I think these parties fall on the left-right spectrum. They are just to illustrate a point:Lets say, hypothecially, that communists were -10000, socialists -1000, green party -100… so all on the left… now if the democrats were -1, and the GOP were +1, then the democrats would be on the left, and the GOP on the right, but the democrats would be more similar in general to the GOP than they would any of the other parties on the left. Doesnt change the fact they are on the left. On a scale from 1-100, I see the GOP about 80. I see the dems about a 70. Dem socialists about 50, socialists about 20. Greens come in at about 30 maybe? Anything to the right of Saunders, at 50, is ‘right wing.’ Anything to the left of him is ‘left wing.’Thats an odd scale being one-sided to represent a two dimensional property…. in this scale 1 represents “the least X” and 100 represents “the most X” what is X?. A single magnitude scale makes no sense when talking about a binary unbounded spectrum.@Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei
(DIR) Post #Aa0IzxcRpLiFeQcFZQ by JonKramer@qoto.org
2023-09-21T21:11:17Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@freemo @Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei100 would be Genghis Khan. 0 would be government at all. Number lines are just a range. I just don’t see the need for anything other than whole numbers here. If you want to toss in authoritarians… then refer to the Nolan charts.
(DIR) Post #Aa0JoCvdBIw5byY3RQ by freemo@qoto.org
2023-09-21T21:20:18Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@JonKramer 100 would be Genghis Khan. 0 would be government at all.No im not asking examples of things that are at 0 or 100… I am asking, what quality is 0 to 100 measuring? I just don’t see the need for anything other than whole numbers here.My objection has nothing to do with you using whole numbers. I used whole numbers in my example too. The difference here is more fundemental than that…my line had an absolute inflection point (0) that divides the two categories, yours has an arbitrary point (50) which is relative rather than absolute, that makes a huge difference. Your scale represents things like “hot, cold, warm” but would fail to represent things like “what is my altitude above sea level” where there is a clear 0 people, clear negatives, and clear positives, and no maximum or minimumSo by going from an unbounded (infinite at both ends) scale with an absolute center point (0) to one that has none of that is a VERY different representation and is not capable of representing the information we want. If you want to toss in authoritariansNope, I have no interest in tossing this in, why would we want to it has no relavance to if your on the left or right, it is a different metric. My point is two things can be on the exact same point of the left-right scale and still be vastly different when measured by other scales.@Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei
(DIR) Post #Aa0KAP9MQHVtt1YRsW by JonKramer@qoto.org
2023-09-21T21:24:21Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@freemo @Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei“what quality is 0 to 100 measuring?”A gestalt. 1 being far left principles, 100 being far right. If you want more info:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left%E2%80%93right_political_spectrum#:~:text=Generally%2C%20the%20left%20wing%20is,tradition%2C%20reaction%20and%20nationalism%22.
(DIR) Post #Aa0KzaR8De4NezGwbI by freemo@qoto.org
2023-09-21T21:33:35Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@JonKramer A gestalt. 1 being far left principles, 100 being far right. If you want more info: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left%E2%80%93right_political_spectrum#:~:text=Generally%2C%20the%20left%20wing%20is,tradition%2C%20reaction%20and%20nationalism%22.Your response is non-sensical. You are telling me you are measuring two properties, left-principles vs right principles, and using a one dimensional value to represent a two dimensional idea… that makes no sense.Take altitude from my earlier example (which is a value of the same dimensions as left-right)… how would you represent that on a 0-100 scale… you cant, like its literally impossible. This is true for the exact same reasons its completely nonsensical to use 0-100 to represent left-right.@Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei
(DIR) Post #Aa0L9WlIjiDh9vRkYq by JonKramer@qoto.org
2023-09-21T21:35:25Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@freemo @Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei Your argument that one scale is superior to another is going to be ignored by me, because I honestly don’t care what the scale is. I just don’t CARE. No one should.
(DIR) Post #Aa0LbtYhZWJByE51dI by freemo@qoto.org
2023-09-21T21:40:30Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
@JonKramerWhich proves you completely dont understand how scales work.It is the dimensionality of the number that matters. It just so happens you must use different types of scales to represent different dimensionalities. Thats a fundemental fact of numbers.They are functional, practically and fundementally different. One is literally impossible to represent the idea, the other isnt.I mean for example, which ideology do you place at 0 (the most left end of the scale)? Whatever ideology that is, how woudl you then represent a different ideology that is more left wing than whatever you attached at 0… you couldnt, because your on a bounded scale not an unbounded.Moreover, where on your scale would you put a party or person that is neither left nor right, 50? I have 50 of what? Nothing? The inflection point itself is less of an issue, the bounding of the scale is.@Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei
(DIR) Post #Aa0Ln2YETjVt2sAuKu by freemo@qoto.org
2023-09-21T21:42:25Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@JonKramerIf scales dont matter, im going to sit here and wait patiently while you try to explain to me how you’d represent a value like altitude (same dimensional as left-right) on a scale of 0-100I’ll wait…@Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei
(DIR) Post #Aa0LnE0HtlUUZ4Ny5o by JonKramer@qoto.org
2023-09-21T21:42:36Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@freemo @Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei If you don’t use Kelvin, you are WRONG and don’t know how scales work!!! Also, only 24 hour clocks are acceptable, and only sidereal time!
(DIR) Post #Aa0M4nzFMoJj5UHWng by freemo@qoto.org
2023-09-21T21:45:44Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@JonKramer If you don’t use Kelvin, you are WRONG and don’t know how scales work!!! Also, only 24 hour clocks are acceptable, and only sidereal time!Again this shows you dont even understand what is being set, yet insist on disagreeing with it.Kelvin, celcius, and fairnheit are all the same dimensional scales, so they are interchangeable and arbitrary. It doesnt matter.However you do prove my point because like your other non-sensical example, kelvin cant be represented as 0-100 either, because 0-100 is double bounded and kelvin is single bounded…Go ahead, try to explain how you could represent temperature on a scale of 0-100.. ill wait.@Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei
(DIR) Post #Aa0M5pu9ioGxKEOMka by JonKramer@qoto.org
2023-09-21T21:45:56Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@freemo @Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakeiYou will wait for a LONG time. Because I just don’t care. It is irrelevant.
(DIR) Post #Aa0MFbkXCmeQJsYEt6 by freemo@qoto.org
2023-09-21T21:47:41Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@JonKramerExactly its not possible and you are incapable.. but your so stubborn instead of admitting you are clueless your gonna pretend that now that you have to prove yourself you dont care and walk away…Pretty transparent at this point your either intellectually dishonest or arguing in bad faith… not sure which.@Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei
(DIR) Post #Aa0MMDssKowCKTbgoK by freemo@qoto.org
2023-09-21T21:48:53Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@JonKramer If you don’t use Kelvin, you are WRONG and don’t know how scales work!!! Also, only 24 hour clocks are acceptable, and only sidereal time!Again this shows you dont even understand what is being said, yet insist on disagreeing with it.Kelvin, celcius, and fairnheit are all the same dimensional scales, so they are interchangeable and arbitrary. It doesnt matter.However you do prove my point because like your other non-sensical example, kelvin cant be represented as 0-100 either, because 0-100 is double bounded and kelvin is single bounded…Go ahead, try to explain how you could represent temperature on a scale of 0-100.. ill wait.@Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei
(DIR) Post #Aa0Mp7tBhdxk8NXF5c by JonKramer@qoto.org
2023-09-21T21:54:08Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@freemo @Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei“Go ahead, try to explain how you could represent temperature on a scale of 0-100.. ill wait.”0 would be zero atomic/molecular/KE vibration, 100 would be vibrations at the speed of light? that could work. Or you could reverse it and call 0 the maximum energy level possible, and 100 the minimum… That could work as well. Or you could make it a logarithmic scale, or a scale that fluctuates based on how many cats you own on any given day.
(DIR) Post #Aa0NIEzeMudCZ7ROG8 by freemo@qoto.org
2023-09-21T21:59:22Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@JonKramer 0 would be zero atomic/molecular/KE vibration, 100 would be vibrations at the speed of light?first off….Temperature isnt limited by speed of light limitations in the physical world… temperature keeps increasing but is represented by exotic pair production rather than increases in speed (remember temperature is not limited to the speed of molecules, it exists even when there are no molcules to speak of in the form of IR).You are proving my point… you are trying to make some fictional “maximum temperature” so you can fit it into your broken 0-100… but we are talking about temperature as a value that is bound on one end (the low end) and unbound on the other… so your being dishonest, again, and trying to cheat.@Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei
(DIR) Post #Aa0OhrWmKsjLGsiY2y by robryk@qoto.org
2023-09-21T22:15:13Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@freemo @JonKramer @Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakeiIt doesn’t seem to be about boundedness: consider open interval (0,1). There is no leftmost point, and yet the interval is bounded.
(DIR) Post #Aa0P2YcpoEuWjCQ06y by freemo@qoto.org
2023-09-21T22:18:55Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@robrykno its still about boundedness, that just address the leftmost aspect but its actually more complicated than just that (jon was struggling with the basics so i didnt want to make it this technical)…So take your example… how would you map an unbounded variable like altitutde to your (0,1) interval… even though you removed the idea of a “left most” the mapping still cant occur linearly.@JonKramer @Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei