Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 109 (8803 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 11-25-2017 12:25 AM
350 online now:
Coyote, dwise1, halibut, Minnemooseus (Adminnemooseus), NoNukes, PaulK (6 members, 344 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: jaufre
Upcoming Birthdays: Raphael
Post Volume:
Total: 822,964 Year: 27,570/21,208 Month: 1,483/1,714 Week: 326/365 Day: 3/50 Hour: 3/1

Announcements: Reporting debate problems OR discussing moderation actions/inactions


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev1
...
45
6
78910Next
Author Topic:   Senator Al Franken?
dronestar
Member
Posts: 1379
From: usa
Joined: 11-19-2008


Message 76 of 144 (703777)
07-29-2013 12:51 PM
Reply to: Message 74 by ringo
07-29-2013 11:52 AM


"treasonous clown"
"treasonous clown" . . .

This is really off-topic but, . . .

The term 'treasonous clown' reminds me of the court jester in fuedal times who was allowed to speak true but treasonous words as long as they were couched in metaphor or told thru songs or jokes. I think John Stewart might be today's modern court jester, as he is one of the only corporate media's allowable ways to gain true insight into modern politics.

But I would use a different definition of 'treasonous clown' when Franken is being referenced.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 74 by ringo, posted 07-29-2013 11:52 AM ringo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 78 by ringo, posted 07-29-2013 1:22 PM dronestar has responded

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 13889
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 1.7


Message 77 of 144 (703779)
07-29-2013 1:19 PM
Reply to: Message 75 by dronestar
07-29-2013 12:42 PM


Re: Michele Bachmann considering challenging Al Franken for his senate seat
dronester writes:

One cannot support the constitution (as Franken's stated in his oath) and attack it at the same time.


Why not? Can't you maintain your home and repair it at the same time? Since when is maintenance different from maintenance?

dronester writes:

So, yes, when the change is evolutionary progressive as Hanna's change was, that is good.

And when the stance changes to support de-evolutionary, pro-police state, fascism, constitution rejectionism, anti-liberty, attacking of right's . . . then it is bad.


So changes that you agree with are good and changes that you disgree with are treason?

dronester writes:

Once you drive over a cliff (oh no, please Tempe, no more cliff analogies), stepping on the brakes doesn't have much an effect . . .


The Constitution gives you the brakes - and the accelerator that got you into trouble in the first place. You'd better make up your mind whether the Constitution should be "supported" as is or needs to be changed.

dronester writes:

It's imperative to fight the attacks on our liberties now, not the next election cycle....

What can I do?


You tell me.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 75 by dronestar, posted 07-29-2013 12:42 PM dronestar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 79 by dronestar, posted 07-29-2013 1:49 PM ringo has responded

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 13889
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 1.7


Message 78 of 144 (703780)
07-29-2013 1:22 PM
Reply to: Message 76 by dronestar
07-29-2013 12:51 PM


Re: "treasonous clown"
dronester writes:

I think John Stewart might be today's modern court jester, as he is one of the only corporate media's allowable ways to gain true insight into modern politics.


Personally, I don't find John Stewart the least bit funny.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 76 by dronestar, posted 07-29-2013 12:51 PM dronestar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 80 by dronestar, posted 07-29-2013 1:50 PM ringo has responded

  
dronestar
Member
Posts: 1379
From: usa
Joined: 11-19-2008


Message 79 of 144 (703783)
07-29-2013 1:49 PM
Reply to: Message 77 by ringo
07-29-2013 1:19 PM


Re: Michele Bachmann considering challenging Al Franken for his senate seat
RingO writes:

Can't you maintain your home and repair it at the same time? Since when is maintenance different from maintenance?

You cannot destroy your home while simultaneously maintaining it.

RingO writes:

So changes that you agree with are good and changes that you disgree with are treason?

As I wrote before, this is Crashfrog's 'relative' counterargument. If you are Adolf Hitler you would be in favor of the things I find repugnant. I get it. If most people prefer to live in nazi Germany, then I guess I need to get used to wearing brownshirts. However, i also believe, for a number of reasons, people fully support things that are against their best interests. That leaves me flatfooted.

Drone writes:

What can I do?

RingO writes:

You tell me.

My limited response is early education in the areas of critical thinking (remember our debate a long time ago?), conflict and anger management, early science classes, global society comparison, religion/fantasy comparison, etc. But it probably wouldn't help for several generations so maybe we are all doomed.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 77 by ringo, posted 07-29-2013 1:19 PM ringo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 81 by ringo, posted 07-29-2013 2:02 PM dronestar has responded
 Message 83 by Rahvin, posted 07-29-2013 2:07 PM dronestar has responded

  
dronestar
Member
Posts: 1379
From: usa
Joined: 11-19-2008


Message 80 of 144 (703784)
07-29-2013 1:50 PM
Reply to: Message 78 by ringo
07-29-2013 1:22 PM


Re: "treasonous clown"
RingO writes:

Personally, I don't find John Stewart the least bit funny.

Do you find him more truthful/insightful than Faux News?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 78 by ringo, posted 07-29-2013 1:22 PM ringo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 82 by ringo, posted 07-29-2013 2:05 PM dronestar has responded

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 13889
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 1.7


Message 81 of 144 (703786)
07-29-2013 2:02 PM
Reply to: Message 79 by dronestar
07-29-2013 1:49 PM


Re: Michele Bachmann considering challenging Al Franken for his senate seat
dronester writes:

You cannot destroy your home while simultaneously maintaining it.


Sure you can. You can gut the spare bedroom to put in an ensuite bathroom.

dronester writes:

If you are Adolf Hitler you would be in favor of the things I find repugnant.


My views are probably closer to yours than to Hitler's and possibly than Franken's too. I'm not defending either Hitler's views or Franken's. I'm just pointing out how ludicrously over-the-top your criticism is.

It's a democracy. He's allowed to have views different from yours. People are allowed to vote for him. People are allowed to be wrong, for that matter.

Being flatfooted doesn't do you or anybody else any good.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 79 by dronestar, posted 07-29-2013 1:49 PM dronestar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 84 by dronestar, posted 07-29-2013 3:04 PM ringo has responded

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 13889
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 1.7


Message 82 of 144 (703788)
07-29-2013 2:05 PM
Reply to: Message 80 by dronestar
07-29-2013 1:50 PM


Re: "treasonous clown"
dronester writes:

ringo writes:

Personally, I don't find John Stewart the least bit funny.


Do you find him more truthful/insightful than Faux News?

I find all American politics incredibly boring. It's no wonder nobody votes.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 80 by dronestar, posted 07-29-2013 1:50 PM dronestar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 85 by dronestar, posted 07-29-2013 3:05 PM ringo has responded

  
Rahvin
Member (Idle past 781 days)
Posts: 3964
Joined: 07-01-2005


(2)
Message 83 of 144 (703790)
07-29-2013 2:07 PM
Reply to: Message 79 by dronestar
07-29-2013 1:49 PM


Re: Michele Bachmann considering challenging Al Franken for his senate seat
You cannot destroy your home while simultaneously maintaining it.

It is entirely possible to support the Constitution as a symbol of the rule of law and many of the principles it attempts to legislate, while simultaneously attacking provisions that are seen as unjust.

For example, it would have been entirely possible in 1800 to vehemently attack the 3/5s rule while still supporting the Constitution as a whole. Or to argue against the exclusion of women from voting as a contradiction with the guarantee of equal protection under the law.

After all, the Constitution is intended to be a living document, being amended as needed by future generations. That's why we no longer have slaves. That's why it was legal to buy alcohol, then illegal, then legal again. That's why women can vote. I imagine we'll amend that document more before we're done with it. The amendment process will require "attacks" from people who still support the Constitution as a whole, and who still support the rule of law.

The most frightening problems today are not about threats to change the Constitution, or attacks against it. Rather, the most frightening precedents are those cases in which the Constitution is simply ignored, rather than attacked or changed.


“The human understanding when it has once adopted an opinion (either as being the received opinion or as being agreeable to itself) draws all things else to support and agree with it.” - Francis Bacon

"There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs." - John Rogers

“A world that can be explained even with bad reasons is a familiar world. But, on the other hand, in a universe suddenly divested of illusions and lights, man feels an alien, a stranger. His exile is without remedy since he is deprived of the memory of a lost home or the hope of a promised land. This divorce between man and his life, the actor and his setting, is properly the feeling of absurdity.” – Albert Camus

"...the pious hope that by combining numerous little turds of variously tainted data, one can obtain a valuable result; but in fact, the outcome is merely a larger than average pile of shit." - Barash, David 1995...

"Many that live deserve death. And some die that deserve life. Can you give it to them? Then be not too eager to deal out death in the name of justice, fearing for your own safety. Even the wise cannot see all ends." - Gandalf, J. R. R. Tolkien: The Lord Of the Rings


This message is a reply to:
 Message 79 by dronestar, posted 07-29-2013 1:49 PM dronestar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 86 by dronestar, posted 07-29-2013 3:09 PM Rahvin has responded

  
dronestar
Member
Posts: 1379
From: usa
Joined: 11-19-2008


Message 84 of 144 (703796)
07-29-2013 3:04 PM
Reply to: Message 81 by ringo
07-29-2013 2:02 PM


Re: Michele Bachmann considering challenging Al Franken for his senate seat
You cannot destroy your home while simultaneously maintaining it.

RingO writes:

Sure you can. You can gut the spare bedroom to put in an ensuite bathroom.

Ringo, your flippant arguments are revealing. I didn't write "bedroom." I wrote 'home." As in 'entire house.' You are attempting to marginalize what Franken is doing, like repainting a closet in your home example. Franken is attacking the constitution, not merely re-window dressing it. Attacking is not the same as supporting the constituion as he took an oath to do. BTW, did I write that Franken took an oath to support the constitution?

RingO writes:

My views are probably closer to yours than to Hitler's and possibly than Franken's too.

"Probably"?

RingO writes:

I'm not defending either Hitler's views or Franken's. I'm just pointing out how ludicrously over-the-top your criticism is.

The only way you could possibly show I am over-the-top in supporting basic rights and liberties is by defending Hitler.

RingO writes:

It's a democracy.

"Democracy"??? Do you even know what the constitution and its amendments and my argument is all about? . . .

quote:
It is a fundamental principle of American democracy that laws should not be public only when it is convenient for government officials to make them public. They should be public all the time, open to review by adversarial courts, and subject to change by an accountable legislature guided by an informed public. If Americans are not able to learn how their government is interpreting and executing the law then we have effectively eliminated the most important bulwark of our democracy.

http://www.alternet.org/...n-nsa-spying-its-bad-snowden-says


RingO writes:

He's allowed to have views different from yours.

No. he made an oath to support the constitution. He is not allowed to change that part. Do you know what an oath is?

RingO writes:

People are allowed to be wrong, for that matter.

Are you saying you are okay with Hitler being merely wrong?

RingO writes:

Being flatfooted doesn't do you or anybody else any good.

No kidding. I concur.

Edited by dronester, : Added Wyden's quote


This message is a reply to:
 Message 81 by ringo, posted 07-29-2013 2:02 PM ringo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 90 by ringo, posted 07-30-2013 12:02 PM dronestar has responded

  
dronestar
Member
Posts: 1379
From: usa
Joined: 11-19-2008


Message 85 of 144 (703797)
07-29-2013 3:05 PM
Reply to: Message 82 by ringo
07-29-2013 2:05 PM


Re: "treasonous clown"
Do you find him more truthful/insightful than Faux News?

RingO writes:

I find all American politics incredibly boring. It's no wonder nobody votes.

Do you find him more truthful/insightful than Faux News?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 82 by ringo, posted 07-29-2013 2:05 PM ringo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 91 by ringo, posted 07-30-2013 12:07 PM dronestar has not yet responded

  
dronestar
Member
Posts: 1379
From: usa
Joined: 11-19-2008


Message 86 of 144 (703798)
07-29-2013 3:09 PM
Reply to: Message 83 by Rahvin
07-29-2013 2:07 PM


Re: Michele Bachmann considering challenging Al Franken for his senate seat
Rahvin writes:

It is entirely possible to support the Constitution as a symbol of the rule of law and many of the principles it attempts to legislate, while simultaneously attacking provisions that are seen as unjust.

The OP is about Franken. I have brought up his recent vote to attack the 4th amendment. Franken voted AGAINST the Amash NSA Amendment (ends the indiscriminate collection of phone and email records) last Wednesday.

Are you arguing this recent specific vote is against a provision of the constitution which is unfair?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 83 by Rahvin, posted 07-29-2013 2:07 PM Rahvin has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 88 by Rahvin, posted 07-29-2013 4:18 PM dronestar has responded

  
dronestar
Member
Posts: 1379
From: usa
Joined: 11-19-2008


Message 87 of 144 (703800)
07-29-2013 3:22 PM


Sen. Ron Wyden On NSA Spying: It's As Bad As Snowden Says
Dem Senator Ron Wyden's article (below) is a must read for anybody who supports liberties and rights. The american people have been and are continuing to be deceived by the government. When the Bush Jr administration did this, liberals were all angry. Now where is everyone when Obama does it? Just the sounds of crickets?

quote:
The combination of increasingly advanced technology with a breakdown in the checks and balances that limit government action could lead us to a surveillance state that cannot be reversed.

quote:
“Ron, how can the law be secret? When you guys pass laws that’s a public deal. I’m going to look them up online.” In response, I tell Oregonians that there are effectively two Patriot Acts ­­the first is the one that they can read on their laptop in Medford or Portland, analyze and understand. Then there’s the real Patriot Act—the secret interpretation of the law that the government is actually relying upon. The secret rulings of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court have interpreted the Patriot Act, as well as section 702 of the FISA statute, in some surprising ways, and these rulings are kept entirely secret from the public. These rulings can be astoundingly broad.

quote:
It is a fundamental principle of American democracy that laws should not be public only when it is convenient for government officials to make them public. They should be public all the time, open to review by adversarial courts, and subject to change by an accountable legislature guided by an informed public. If Americans are not able to learn how their government is interpreting and executing the law then we have effectively eliminated the most important bulwark of our democracy.

quote:
Outside the names of the FISA court judges, virtually everything else is secret about the court. Their rulings are secret, which makes challenging them in an appeals court almost impossible. Their proceedings are secret too, but I can tell you that they are almost always one­sided.

quote:
. . . not only were the existence of and the legal justification for these programs kept completely secret from the American people, senior officials from across the government were making statements to the public about domestic surveillance that were clearly misleading and at times simply false.

http://www.alternet.org/...n-nsa-spying-its-bad-snowden-says


  
Rahvin
Member (Idle past 781 days)
Posts: 3964
Joined: 07-01-2005


Message 88 of 144 (703806)
07-29-2013 4:18 PM
Reply to: Message 86 by dronestar
07-29-2013 3:09 PM


Re: Michele Bachmann considering challenging Al Franken for his senate seat
The OP is about Franken. I have brought up his recent vote to attack the 4th amendment. Franken voted AGAINST the Amash NSA Amendment (ends the indiscriminate collection of phone and email records) last Wednesday.

Are you arguing this recent specific vote is against a provision of the constitution which is unfair?

Not at all. In fact I wrote a lengthy appeal to my own congresswoman in favor of the amendment to de-fund the program. Incidentally, she did in fact vote for the amendment.

I'm simply pointing out that your absolutist argument that it is impossible to simultaneously support and attack the Constitution is invalid. Nothing more.

As is often the case, you and I agree on the larger issue and might disagree on specific arguments to arrive at similar conclusions.


“The human understanding when it has once adopted an opinion (either as being the received opinion or as being agreeable to itself) draws all things else to support and agree with it.” - Francis Bacon

"There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs." - John Rogers

“A world that can be explained even with bad reasons is a familiar world. But, on the other hand, in a universe suddenly divested of illusions and lights, man feels an alien, a stranger. His exile is without remedy since he is deprived of the memory of a lost home or the hope of a promised land. This divorce between man and his life, the actor and his setting, is properly the feeling of absurdity.” – Albert Camus

"...the pious hope that by combining numerous little turds of variously tainted data, one can obtain a valuable result; but in fact, the outcome is merely a larger than average pile of shit." - Barash, David 1995...

"Many that live deserve death. And some die that deserve life. Can you give it to them? Then be not too eager to deal out death in the name of justice, fearing for your own safety. Even the wise cannot see all ends." - Gandalf, J. R. R. Tolkien: The Lord Of the Rings


This message is a reply to:
 Message 86 by dronestar, posted 07-29-2013 3:09 PM dronestar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 89 by dronestar, posted 07-29-2013 4:39 PM Rahvin has not yet responded

  
dronestar
Member
Posts: 1379
From: usa
Joined: 11-19-2008


Message 89 of 144 (703811)
07-29-2013 4:39 PM
Reply to: Message 88 by Rahvin
07-29-2013 4:18 PM


Re: Michele Bachmann considering challenging Al Franken for his senate seat
Rahvin writes:

I'm simply pointing out that your absolutist argument that it is impossible to simultaneously support and attack the Constitution is invalid.

But it seems only when using a quantifier, "when the constitution has some provision which is unfair," can you demonstrate my argument is possibly invalid.

Since Franken's vote against the constitution does NOT have a provision which is unfair, I have demonstrated in this specific case, that he cannot support and attack the constitution at the same time.

PS, congrats to having an ethical congresswoman. Most americans should be envious.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 88 by Rahvin, posted 07-29-2013 4:18 PM Rahvin has not yet responded

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 13889
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 1.7


Message 90 of 144 (703879)
07-30-2013 12:02 PM
Reply to: Message 84 by dronestar
07-29-2013 3:04 PM


Re: Michele Bachmann considering challenging Al Franken for his senate seat
dronester writes:

I didn't write "bedroom." I wrote 'home." As in 'entire house.'


Are you being deliberately disingenuous? You know very well that you can renovate your home by "destroying" one room at a time. And Franken isn't even advocating destroying the whole Constitution, only a couple of bedrooms.

dronester writes:

Franken is attacking the constitution, not merely re-window dressing it.


You're implying criminal intent, yet he faces no criminal charges. It seems that your position is the unconventional one.

dronester writes:

"Democracy"??? Do you even know what the constitution and its amendments and my argument is all about? . . .


You haven't been very clear about that.

You've mentioned Snowden a couple of times, so maybe he has something to do with your point? In my opinion, he shouldn't be prosecuted (I believe I mentioned that I consider "treason" to be an obsolete idea) but other people have other opinions and they should be allowed to express them.

dronester writes:

Do you know what an oath is?


Yes, it's an empty formality.

dronester writes:

Are you saying you are okay with Hitler being merely wrong?


It might be an interesting aside to discuss whether or not Hitler could have been tried for his crimes. (There's a novel called The Trial of Adolf Hitler by Phillipe van Rjndt that discusses some of the difficulties.) But more appropriate to this topic is whether or not Al Franken can be tried for his "crimes".
This message is a reply to:
 Message 84 by dronestar, posted 07-29-2013 3:04 PM dronestar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 95 by dronestar, posted 07-31-2013 10:17 AM ringo has responded

  
Prev1
...
45
6
78910Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017