Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 … 11

 

2013-02-08 08:48:03
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5359|London, England

Uzique The Lesser wrote:

Jay wrote:

Macbeth wrote:

I don't like that way of thinking. The "the economy is more important than gay rights" line is infuriating. If you think making sure a suburban family can afford a second vacation and an iPad for the toddler is more important than equal rights than you need to rethink your life values. If everyone isn't equal than none of this is worth it.
How about finding work for the 12.3 million people currently without jobs?

or this:

http://www.lawrencetam.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/Food-Stamps.png


A few thousand people earning the right to marry kind of pales in comparison.

I know you've never been poor, and that being out of work to you means not being able to take a second vacation, or providing an iPad for a toddler, but that's not reality. A strong economy is fundamentally the most important thing this country could possess. Everything else is just frosting on the cake.
no one is saying that gay marriage is more important or takes precedence over the economy, you fucking dimwit. the much-derided fallacy of those "we should focus on the economy!" arguments is that it presumes the executive, legislature or demos in general can only cope with ONE issue at a time. like all of our attention must be focussed altogether now on one problem, until that is fixed and totally sorted, and then we can move serially onto the next. what sort of fucking reasoning is that? there is absolutely no excuse for delaying a civil rights / social issue - even if it is deemed secondary in importance - because there are 'bigger problems'. that's a very fox news media-based conception of society working. do you presume the people running the state are fucking goldfishes, or something? YOU CAN PURSUE SOLUTIONS TO MORE THAN ONE PROBLEM AT ONCE! it's amazing, i know.

here's a strange thought, i know: on days when all the news channels are covering gay marriage, that doesn't mean the people assigned to the task of fixing the economy have taken the day off to snort blow, listen to disco, and anally fist one another. they're still there. shit is still getting done. we don't exist in a world that is ontologically constructed by bill o'reilly's autocue.
Actually, that was precisely Macbeths argument.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
2013-02-08 08:50:01
Uzique The Lesser
Banned
+382|4255
i think macbeth's point was that fixing the gay rights issue is just as pressing and just as demanding of the present situation as the economy. and it is. there is nothing to say that an experience of economic inequality/injustice is any more severe than social inequality/injustice. one is an impoverishment of the spirit; the other of the material. and there is no valid reason to defer fixing or addressing gay/social rights issues because the economy is going down the crapper. you can do both today. there are enough xperts. we have the resources.

of course, major news networks like to stick to one meta-narrative at a time, as it keeps the presentation of reality as simplistic and manageable as possible. this is based on the assumption that most viewers are attention-deficit, and so incapable of dealing with the multiplicand complexities of the 'real world' that they demand their news/reality to be spoonfed to them one big, well-structured, declarative issue at a time. are you that stupid jay? why can't we have gays marrying and economic reform on the same day? pretty please?

Last edited by Uzique The Lesser (2013-02-08 08:53:08)

2013-02-08 08:51:46
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5359|London, England

Uzique The Lesser wrote:

i think macbeth's point was that fixing the gay rights issue is just as pressing and just as demanding of the present situation as the economy. and it is. and there is no valid reason to defer fixing or addressing gay/social rights issues because the economy is going down the crapper. you can do both today. there are enough xperts. we have the resources.
Yes, in a perfect world, but we're American. You get an either/or choice of [socially liberal/fiscally retarded] or [socially retarded/fiscally less-retarded] when you cast your vote.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
2013-02-08 08:55:17
Uzique The Lesser
Banned
+382|4255

Jay wrote:

Uzique The Lesser wrote:

i think macbeth's point was that fixing the gay rights issue is just as pressing and just as demanding of the present situation as the economy. and it is. and there is no valid reason to defer fixing or addressing gay/social rights issues because the economy is going down the crapper. you can do both today. there are enough xperts. we have the resources.
Yes, in a perfect world, but we're American. You get an either/or choice of [socially liberal/fiscally retarded] or [socially retarded/fiscally less-retarded] when you cast your vote.
great. bi-partisanship. that's going to get you somewhere. no compromise. ideologues. that really worked out well for, like, every single political system/society in the past. rigidity and a failure to adapt marks the stopping point of historical progress, and the death and senescence of a society. being stuck in political/social/cultural norms is basically ossification, drawn out in the banal everyday. you talk about it like it's a strength or selling point of the american system. that's cool.
2013-02-08 09:03:40
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5359|London, England

Uzique The Lesser wrote:

Jay wrote:

Uzique The Lesser wrote:

i think macbeth's point was that fixing the gay rights issue is just as pressing and just as demanding of the present situation as the economy. and it is. and there is no valid reason to defer fixing or addressing gay/social rights issues because the economy is going down the crapper. you can do both today. there are enough xperts. we have the resources.
Yes, in a perfect world, but we're American. You get an either/or choice of [socially liberal/fiscally retarded] or [socially retarded/fiscally less-retarded] when you cast your vote.
great. bi-partisanship. that's going to get you somewhere. no compromise. ideologues. that really worked out well for, like, every single political system/society in the past. rigidity and a failure to adapt marks the stopping point of historical progress, and the death and senescence of a society. being stuck in political/social/cultural norms is basically ossification, drawn out in the banal everyday. you talk about it like it's a strength or selling point of the american system. that's cool.
It is to a certain extent. It prevents sweeping change from occurring rapidly. Considering the intelligence levels of the people we elect, that's generally a good thing. It's harder for them to break stuff.

Besides, even Obama: Champion of Liberals, Ender of Wars, Winner of Swedish Medals, (Teleprompter in Chief) has basically done nothing to further gay rights. Yeah, DADT was ended, but that was a token victory for gay rights. He's not pushing to end DOMA, and he has no plans to do anything but respect states that vote in favor of allowing gay marriage... which totally contradicts his stance on states rights on every other issue... convenient.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
2013-02-08 09:07:25
Spearhead
Gulf coast redneck hippy
+731|6690|Tampa Bay Florida
Actually, there's a thing known as "political capital".  Spending it on issues that will fix themselves over time is pretty stupid imo.  It's a distraction.

I'm all for gay rights but I don't see it as all that important.  Why?  Because there are too many old conservatives in politics and fighting the good fight now means losing it on some other issue.  I made the same point in the gun thread.
2013-02-08 09:11:08
Uzique The Lesser
Banned
+382|4255
political capital is a spurious abstraction. useful in theoretical terms and academic-sociological studies, but not as practice. it's the same tenuous pseudo-science that sees obama get other people to choose his daily tie because of his "attention capital". there is absolutely no reason why the legislative and legal process cannot make progress towards gay rights at the same time as your financial institutions and executive direct financial reform. IT'S NOT THE SAME PEOPLE BEING ASKED TO DO ALL THE DAMN TASKS. this sort of thinking is surely the consequence of a nation who have Ritalin with their morning bran-flakes.

Last edited by Uzique The Lesser (2013-02-08 09:12:03)

2013-02-08 09:13:53
Spearhead
Gulf coast redneck hippy
+731|6690|Tampa Bay Florida
Biden and the others were right.  Obama should have waited to pass healthcare reform.  He totally fucked himself and the country, and now we have a half baked piece of shit that no one likes and no one understands.  Hooray.
2013-02-08 09:14:11
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5359|London, England
Well, it sort of is, because everything has to pass through the legislature.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
2013-02-08 09:18:19
Uzique The Lesser
Banned
+382|4255

Jay wrote:

Well, it sort of is, because everything has to pass through the legislature.
i don't know what sort of legislative process you guys have that means you can only work on one issue at a time... but it's a fucking terrible one. are you telling me that's so? it's GAYS or THE ECONOMY? exclusively? one or the other? the world's greatest superpower can't contemplate more than one issue at a time? whatever are you doing about GUN LAWS and IRAQ-AFGHAN, if the economy is so bad? aaaaaah! no wonder you're constantly decrying the end of american power. it's structurally fucked! one problem at a time! form an orderly queue!

Last edited by Uzique The Lesser (2013-02-08 09:19:23)

2013-02-08 09:22:25
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5359|London, England

Uzique The Lesser wrote:

Jay wrote:

Well, it sort of is, because everything has to pass through the legislature.
i don't know what sort of legislative process you guys have that means you can only work on one issue at a time... but it's a fucking terrible one.
It's called a democracy. Politicians have to preen for the cameras, have their voices heard, and make sure that every single voter knows how they are voting on a certain issue before it even makes it to the floor.

I'll break it down for you though. Ready? The House of Representatives is controlled by Republicans. The Senate is controlled by Democrats. The Presidency is controlled by Democrats. For a piece of legislation to become law, it must first be sponsored in both the Senate and House, pass both houses with at least a simple majority, and then it goes before the President to be signed into law. If either the House or the Senate fails to advance a piece of legislation, it does not go any further. Republicans in the House will not pass a law repealing DOMA or recognizing same sex marriage. Game Over.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
2013-02-08 09:28:29
Uzique The Lesser
Banned
+382|4255
it's called american democracy. which is almost a knowing-wink irony of a term thesedays. it's not "called democracy". the assumption that your corporate-hijacked, interest-grouped, 'us or them' democracy is the archetype... is hilarious. we have a democracy here. we can debate and legislate reform in healthcare, education, and gay marriage! all in one week! crazy stuff. it's almost like the greek forum, all over again. such a rapid exchange of ideas!!!!! we have three main parties, too, not two! imagine! and two separate houses that have to vote on everything, too! shouldn't it be even more difficult? oh wait, no. it's not.

Last edited by Uzique The Lesser (2013-02-08 09:30:14)

2013-02-08 09:36:45
Spearhead
Gulf coast redneck hippy
+731|6690|Tampa Bay Florida
The American two party system is superior to everything else in the world

There I said it
2013-02-08 09:37:44
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5359|London, England

Spearhead wrote:

The American two party system is superior to everything else in the world

There I said it
At least we get to vote for our national leader, ya know?
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
2013-02-08 09:39:47
Ultrafunkula
Hector: Ding, ding, ding, ding...
+1,975|6474|6 6 4 oh, I forget

Aren't you voting for some dingdong who promised to vote for dongding for president if dingdong wins the village election?
2013-02-08 09:40:26
13urnzz
Banned
+5,830|6498

correct.
2013-02-08 09:44:10
Ultrafunkula
Hector: Ding, ding, ding, ding...
+1,975|6474|6 6 4 oh, I forget

Well then what if dingdong breaks his promise and votes for dongdong instead of dongding?
2013-02-08 09:45:29
Spearhead
Gulf coast redneck hippy
+731|6690|Tampa Bay Florida
Then youre FUCKED
2013-02-08 09:48:14
Uzique The Lesser
Banned
+382|4255

Jay wrote:

Spearhead wrote:

The American two party system is superior to everything else in the world

There I said it
At least we get to vote for our national leader, ya know?
yeah, i mean the cult of personality is such a good thing. obama really has single-handedly been an avatar for change, hasn't he.

focusing on one head of state is irrational. it means people rarely engage with realpolitik or the concrete details of their party policy and manifesto. instead people just vote in a thinly-disguised popularity contest. telling comments that the invention of TV politics/debates changed the shape of american elections. because people vote on appearance and superficialities. hardly an unassailable benefit of your system then, is it? a distraction, if anything. the presidential race is a billion-dollar puppet-show.

i mean, you said yourself: the american democratic system is crippled. partisanship and monied interests put a freeze on everything. sure must be great you get to vote in one guy who is hamstrung everytime he tries to push a major political decision! all that focus on the head of state really has a payoff, huh, when it's the invisible lobbyists that really are the 'invisible hand'.

Last edited by Uzique The Lesser (2013-02-08 09:49:55)

2013-02-08 10:22:33
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5359|London, England

Ultrafunkula wrote:

Well then what if dingdong breaks his promise and votes for dongdong instead of dongding?
He can't.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
2013-02-08 12:45:54
coke
Aye up duck!
+440|6710|England. Stoke
America doing things, one thing, at a time!

Last edited by coke (2013-02-08 12:46:12)

2013-02-08 15:17:44
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,810|6106|eXtreme to the maX

Jay wrote:

Uzique The Lesser wrote:

i think macbeth's point was that fixing the gay rights issue is just as pressing and just as demanding of the present situation as the economy. and it is. and there is no valid reason to defer fixing or addressing gay/social rights issues because the economy is going down the crapper. you can do both today. there are enough xperts. we have the resources.
Yes, in a perfect world, but we're American. You get an either/or choice of [socially liberal/fiscally retarded] or [socially retarded/fiscally less-retarded] when you cast your vote.
Cutting taxes and increasing spending during a war is fiscally less retarded?
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
2013-02-08 15:20:10
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+2,053|6772|PNW

Jay's wrong. We get a choice between socially liberal/fiscally retarded or socially retarded/fiscally retarded.
2013-02-08 18:39:41
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,810|6106|eXtreme to the maX
The GOP claims to be fiscally conservative, and yet they've never tried it to see if it works.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
2013-02-08 19:18:47
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5359|London, England
True, but at least they pay lip service to the deficit and regulations.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat

 

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 … 11

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2024 Jeff Minard