Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: reason and the fair point


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: reason and the fair point Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: reason and the fair point - 1/7/2010 4:37:25 PM   
popeye1250


Posts: 18104
Joined: 1/27/2006
From: New Hampshire
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyEllen

Tom, I have no idea what youre talking about; a little explanation might go a long way

E


Lady E, well, when you present any argument or scientific evidence that in any way goes against the ..."philosophy" of the "global warming" cult they simply discard it.

_____________________________

"But Your Honor, this is not a Jury of my Peers, these people are all decent, honest, law-abiding citizens!"

(in reply to LadyEllen)
Profile   Post #: 21
RE: reason and the fair point - 1/7/2010 6:33:34 PM   
kdsub


Posts: 12180
Joined: 8/16/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: LillyoftheVally


quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub
So just argue the truth and don’t worry if they agree with you.



Problem is very rarely is it about truth and fiction, instead it is about opinion dressed as fact.


This is very true...but there are many here...and i think I am one that force fact to be presented against opinion.

Now I often give my opinion but when I do I say it is opinion...There are many subjects that don't have a right or wrong at least clear cut...so all you can do is express an opinion and give reason you think it may be closer to the truth.

Butch


_____________________________

Mark Twain:

I don't see any use in having a uniform and arbitrary way of spelling words. We might as well make all clothes alike and cook all dishes alike. Sameness is tiresome; variety is pleasing

(in reply to LillyoftheVally)
Profile   Post #: 22
RE: reason and the fair point - 1/7/2010 6:35:50 PM   
kdsub


Posts: 12180
Joined: 8/16/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: housesub4you

quote:

So just argue the truth and don’t worry if they agree with you.


You realize of course that we are talking about American politics, do you know how hard it is to find the truth in politicians,

It's hard enough just to get them to somewhat answer a question with something more than a vague thought, so they can deny it later or say No that is not what I meant




They can talk all they want but they can't hide their actions over time anyway.

Butch

< Message edited by kdsub -- 1/7/2010 6:36:43 PM >

_____________________________

Mark Twain:

I don't see any use in having a uniform and arbitrary way of spelling words. We might as well make all clothes alike and cook all dishes alike. Sameness is tiresome; variety is pleasing

(in reply to housesub4you)
Profile   Post #: 23
RE: reason and the fair point - 1/7/2010 7:36:46 PM   
vincentML


Posts: 9980
Joined: 10/31/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: housesub4you

You realize of course that we are talking about American politics, do you know how hard it is to find the truth in politicians,

It's hard enough just to get them to somewhat answer a question with something more than a vague thought, so they can deny it later or say No that is not what I meant




Perhaps your expectations are misplaced. To find truth you might go to a temple or church, a research institution, or to a courtroom of justice. American politics is not about truth; it is about winning for the sake of the special interests who provide the money needed to win and keep the incumbants in place. It is also about sectional "truths." What was true for the Slave Power in 1856 was not true for the Industrial Power.

Senator Lieberman of Connecticut, though caucusing with the Democrats did all he could to dilute the competitiveness of the health care bill in the Senate. The City of Hartford, Connecticut is a major center of the Private Health Insurance Industry.

Politics in the US has always been about winning and exercising power. Truth has always been incidental.

_____________________________

vML

Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter. ~ MLK Jr.

(in reply to housesub4you)
Profile   Post #: 24
RE: reason and the fair point - 1/7/2010 8:03:08 PM   
DCWoody


Posts: 1401
Joined: 10/27/2006
Status: offline 		"To find truth you might go to a temple or church"

"It's hard enough just to get them to somewhat answer a question with something more than a vague thought, so they can deny it later or say No that is not what I meant"

That's the same with politicians most places.

(in reply to vincentML)
Profile   Post #: 25
RE: reason and the fair point - 1/7/2010 8:08:56 PM   
vincentML


Posts: 9980
Joined: 10/31/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DCWoody

I find this pretty common in politics, especially so in the usa (yes that is racist, tough :p )....I suspect it's an effect of the polarised black&white outlook, not a cause. I mostly think it's the presidential thing.....a system that ends up with just two individuals to realistically vote for is bad enough, but the selection by separate parties in the usa means they aren't cuddling up to the middle ground of the nation, they're cuddling up to the middle ground of their respective 'side'. I find it best to either ignore (the vast vast majority of) americans on political topics, or discuss issues which don't fit into either side....which is tricky, as everything is crammed in there.


There doesn't seem to be anything ya can do about it sadly.


I could not access your profile Woody so I can only guess you are from the UK from what you have written. We actually have five or six National Political Parties, including the Libertarian, Conservative, and Green parties.

Additionally, however, we have at least 100 State parties - the Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, etc organizations of each State, who are independent from the National Parties. The National Parties work to gain the cooperation of the State parties (through financial assistance and appearances) to unify and support the National candidate of choice, but the State Parties are not so obligated. We do not have the Party discipline you have in a Parliamentary system.

Also, you might know that our President is elected by a Convention of Electors who were chosen by the people of each State on national Election Day. These Electors in theory are not bound to keep their pledge. And some have not historically.

It is all very complicated. But the Electorial College System (I guess that's what you were referring to) allows for each State to set the rules for picking the Electors, and most States with two or three exceptions have opted for winner take all. A Presidential Candidate must win a majority of votes in each State to win all of its Electors. Then he must win a majority of the Electors. It may be confusing but it is quite interesting and it has its roots in the history of our westward expansion from thirteen colonies on a narrow coast between sea and mountains.

Furthermore, we are a nation of 300 million people 3000 miles sea to sea plus Hawaii and Alaska. More complications. Each State has distinct interests and distinct histories. And we are not a Parliamentary system. Our Executive is a co-equal branch with the Legislative and Judiciary.

Apologies if I am lecturing but there are clearly distinct differences between our Nations and our systems of Government even though we more or less share the same language. A crucial difference is that our Presidential Candidates do not arise through the Party system so much as they are Entrepreneurs who capture the Party mechanism through the Primary Election System. Quite different from the UK. Obama campaigned for two years and had to win over the great middle whom you do not hear because they do not cry out as loudly and as obnoxiously as the militant fringe groups on either end. They just vote quietly. There is a truism in American electorial politics: in the Primaries the candidate runs to the base; in the General Election he runs to the middle.

It is not a "polarized black or white outlook" as you have suggested. It is a free for all. It is the old childhood game of "king of the Hill" with initially as many as twenty candidates aggressively clawing their way to the top of the Hill.

I hope I have made some sense of it all.

< Message edited by vincentML -- 1/7/2010 8:27:30 PM >

_____________________________

vML

Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter. ~ MLK Jr.

(in reply to DCWoody)
Profile   Post #: 26
RE: reason and the fair point - 1/7/2010 8:55:51 PM   
DCWoody


Posts: 1401
Joined: 10/27/2006
Status: offline 		Not meaning to criticise in any way, thanks a lot for the intent.....but you're not telling me anything I didn't know. I am a Brit ya....and somewhat of a political obsessive :)

I was referring mostly to the primaries when I said selection by 'separate parties'. I'm aware of the existence of different parties, but they mostly split firmly into two sides (green party supports republicans? libertarians supporting the democrats?).....in theory perhaps things could be different within the same system, but for some considerable time you've had two highly polarised parties uttery dominant (I have no idea the last time another party got more than a handful of electoral college, but suspect it's a long time ago)...and my (limited admittedly) knowledge of the various party systems that you've had suggests it has always been divisive. Things like the electoral college don't help, the 'winner takes all' approach taken by almost all states can't aid the warlike mindset of the opposing parties, activists and voters...neither does the same with the president themselves....elections are win or lose....and for the middle ground usually consist of choosing between the lesser of two evils.

All of which and more, in my opinion, contribute to a culture where any and all political issues are simplified down to an often violent disagreement between two viewpoints.

To go with the hill, it's not one hill.....it's two separate hills with very different terrain being scaled by two groups, with the winners going head to head on a third hill with the terrain combined. Are they the best two climbers of combomount? almost always usually no.

(in reply to vincentML)
Profile   Post #: 27
RE: reason and the fair point - 1/8/2010 7:26:56 AM   
vincentML


Posts: 9980
Joined: 10/31/2009
Status: offline 		Sorry for being so damn pedantic. Knew I was being so as I was writing, but wanted to convey the complexity of our system and wasn't sure you understood, which obviously you do.

The separation into two warring cultures seems to have accelerated with the street demonstrations over the Vietnam War and the rise of the Aquarius generation that was so anit-authoritarian. The populace was not quite so split before then, so I am not sure all of the division can be blamed upon the Electoral winner-take-all system. Prior to that there was quite a comfortable aquiescence by the losing side (exempting the Sectional War of 1860 which had been brewing for 40 years)

The election of 1968 was imo the demarcation between the cultural sides when anti-war protestors were in the streets as were the racial equality legions led my Dr Martin Luther King Jr. The Republican Nixon ran and won upon a most divisive "law and order" Southern strategy in which he co-opted white racism and Patriotism in his campaign. Perhaps he is not to blame. Perhaps it was an inevitability of the flawed culture. We sit today as you spot on perceive atop two separate hills. The hills are clothed in Republican vs Democrat but they are imo really Populace vs Elitist. e.g. those who wish to live their lives unmolested by "big government" and those who "know what's best for the rest."

The Republicans representing those who are lower educated, resentful because of job losses to technology and outsourcing, resentful against immigration that threatens more job loss, resentful against Science challenging their religious precepts, against Wall Streeters who have escaped without penalty for their blatant thievery, and most generally resentful of the elitists - University educated financiers, scientists, and big government academicians - who are imposing a suffocating "socialism" upon the gun loving, free spirited, small business traditional capitalism of "our Founders." Hence the rise of such know-nothing personalities as Sarah Palin of Alaska.

The Democrats on the other hand have rallied around the banner of Progressivism favoring big government programs and beauracracies to solve all problems, notwithstanding the recent short-comings of the behemoth Department of Homeland Security where it seems no one is in charge and the same cracks remain as were available to fall through leading up to 9/11.

Our ills are better understood as a cultural divide rather than an electorial divide. It is not the system but the culture war seething beneath and frequently erupting in volcanic splendor that cannot be reconciled.

< Message edited by vincentML -- 1/8/2010 8:02:46 AM >

_____________________________

vML

Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter. ~ MLK Jr.

(in reply to DCWoody)
Profile   Post #: 28
RE: reason and the fair point - 1/8/2010 7:31:14 AM   
Moonhead


Posts: 16520
Joined: 9/21/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: popeye1250


quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyEllen

Tom, I have no idea what youre talking about; a little explanation might go a long way

E


Lady E, well, when you present any argument or scientific evidence that in any way goes against the ..."philosophy" of the "global warming" cult they simply discard it.

Which the other side in that debate never does, of course.

_____________________________

I like to think he was eaten by rats, in the dark, during a fog. It's what he would have wanted...
(Simon R Green on the late James Herbert)

(in reply to popeye1250)
Profile   Post #: 29
RE: reason and the fair point - 1/8/2010 9:34:11 AM   
rockspider


Posts: 633
Joined: 9/26/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: eyesopened

It's been my observation that a very large number of people would much rather be right than happy.

I hate you! Now i had to clean my keyboard and screen again

(in reply to eyesopened)
Profile   Post #: 30
RE: reason and the fair point - 1/8/2010 10:15:28 AM   
DCWoody


Posts: 1401
Joined: 10/27/2006
Status: offline 		Not at all, I appreicate reading a different theory....I think the second half of your post rather proves my point though....possibly, I'm afraid I'm unable to tell if that was serious or not :)

(in reply to vincentML)
Profile   Post #: 31
RE: reason and the fair point - 1/8/2010 10:24:49 AM   
nephandi


Posts: 4470
Joined: 9/23/2005
From: Cold and magickal Norway in a town near Bergen!
Status: offline 		Greetings

If I am discussing with someone and they prove their point then I will be more than happy to bow and admit that I am wrong. However, often what one person see as evidence for their point of view, another do not acknowledge as evidence. As Rule says, we all have our own truth. I argued with a born again Atheist some time ago that said that since there are several religious that is proof there is no God, for if thee was a God then He would have shown himself to his followers and there would be one true religion. The Atheist presented this as proof that there was nothing Spiritual. I however answered him that what if there is more than one God, what if God can not be understood so He showing himself to different pepole will create different understandings. What if God knows different pepole need different Spiritual paths and so show Him or Her self in various ways. There are so many explanations why there are different Religions other than the explanation that it is all something pepole have made up, so I did not accept the Atheist's evidence as evidence even if he was sure that it was.

I wish you well


_____________________________

Whatever you think you can do or believe you can do, begin it. Action has magic, grace and power in it.--Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

Futon torpedoes, make love not war!--Aswad


(in reply to LadyEllen)
Profile   Post #: 32
RE: reason and the fair point - 1/8/2010 10:42:37 AM   
popeye1250


Posts: 18104
Joined: 1/27/2006
From: New Hampshire
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Moonhead


quote:

ORIGINAL: popeye1250


quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyEllen

Tom, I have no idea what youre talking about; a little explanation might go a long way

E


Lady E, well, when you present any argument or scientific evidence that in any way goes against the ..."philosophy" of the "global warming" cult they simply discard it.

Which the other side in that debate never does, of course.


LOL at "political obsessive!"
Moon, you can't argue against the church of scientology either.

_____________________________

"But Your Honor, this is not a Jury of my Peers, these people are all decent, honest, law-abiding citizens!"

(in reply to Moonhead)
Profile   Post #: 33
RE: reason and the fair point - 1/8/2010 11:45:21 AM   
vincentML


Posts: 9980
Joined: 10/31/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DCWoody

Not at all, I appreicate reading a different theory....I think the second half of your post rather proves my point though....possibly, I'm afraid I'm unable to tell if that was serious or not :)


Yes, I was quite serious, although next week I may think all I wrote today was nonsense.

I think we agree on the conflict but disagree on the cause of the conflict. If I have read you correctly you stress the mechanics and structure of the electoral system ( I agree to some extent but cannot imagine a parliamentary system would be workable here) while I stress the fracture in cultural values which you seem not to wish to acknowledge.

_____________________________

vML

Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter. ~ MLK Jr.

(in reply to DCWoody)
Profile   Post #: 34
RE: reason and the fair point - 1/8/2010 12:25:01 PM   
DCWoody


Posts: 1401
Joined: 10/27/2006
Status: offline 		"while I stress the fracture in cultural values which you seem not to wish to acknowledge."

Not at all, I think I said somewhere up there that it's a 'different political culture', I just think the political system possibly created....and certainly exacerbates...that aspect of american culture. I don't necessarily think ya need a parliamentary system (although I do think it'd be a damn good idea) even something like...states switching to proportional sharing of electoral college would help to some extent. It is one nation, and what happens in individual states will certainly feed off what's happening in others and nationally.....but is the debate within the sharing states calmer and more rational during presidential elections? I don't know, can't even remember which states they are....just a thought.

(in reply to vincentML)
Profile   Post #: 35
RE: reason and the fair point - 1/9/2010 8:40:37 AM   
vincentML


Posts: 9980
Joined: 10/31/2009
Status: offline

Woody;

Maine and Nebraska are the only states that apportion their electoral college votes, and then by majority in each Congressional District, not statewide. So, it appears it is winner take all in each District. I am not real clear on it.

America has ever been divided in one fashion or another, most famously between the Industrial Power of the North and the Slave Power of the South bickering about whether new territories should come in to the Union as free or slave, and how that decision should be made. Before the Civil War this Argument led to the Wars on Mexico from whom we took California, Texas, Arizona, and New Mexico. There was even talk and attempts by the Slave Power to absorb Cuba as a slave state.

Even before that and throughout the 19th Century there was antagonism between the Agricultural small land owning class and the Merchant/Banking class (shadows of that exist today in the Populist vs Elitist clash. Early on, New York considered secession.

There was talk about eliminating the Electoral System in 2000 when Bush won with a minority vote but small states cried out they would then be ignored. Local politicians benefit when National pols come to their state to campaign... money and publicity.

In 1992 Ross Perot ran as an Independent and pulled 19% of the vote. Bush Sr 37% and Clinton 43% Clinton did not have a majority of the popular vote but he had a majority of the Electors and so saved us from having the election thrown to the House of Representatives for decision, as a result of which even I could have become President. Republicans never did see Clinton as a legitamate President however, just as in 2000 Dems never accepted Bush the Younger as legitimate. And today the bizarre fringe of the Conservatives challenge Obama "as not one of us."

Escape from it all? Only if you live in a backwoods cabin and are off the communications grid. The elections saturate our lives. MidTerms are coming like a runaway train in November. Already being debated. All Congressional Reps and 1/3rd Senators are up for election.

It is a never ending battle. There is hardly time to govern because the governing is haunted by the next election. isn't it so in the UK also?

ciao....

_____________________________

vML

Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter. ~ MLK Jr.

(in reply to DCWoody)
Profile   Post #: 36
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2]
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: reason and the fair point Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.094