[ ]   [ ]   [ ]                        [ ]      [ ]   [ ]

Wordle - daily game - NoEnzLefttoSplit - Mar 18, 2024 - 10:26pm
 
Trump - haresfur - Mar 18, 2024 - 10:22pm
 
Photography Forum - Your Own Photos - fractalv - Mar 18, 2024 - 9:09pm
 
March 2024 Photo Theme - Many - fractalv - Mar 18, 2024 - 9:08pm
 
Live Music - oldviolin - Mar 18, 2024 - 8:24pm
 
Cryptic Posts - Leave Them Guessing - Bill_J - Mar 18, 2024 - 8:23pm
 
Damn Dinosaurs! - oldviolin - Mar 18, 2024 - 8:16pm
 
New Forum Member on "What Makes RP Great" - oldviolin - Mar 18, 2024 - 8:02pm
 
Name My Band - oldviolin - Mar 18, 2024 - 8:00pm
 
Irony 101 - oldviolin - Mar 18, 2024 - 7:55pm
 
Radio Paradise Comments - oldviolin - Mar 18, 2024 - 7:35pm
 
One Partying State - Wyoming News - geoff_morphini - Mar 18, 2024 - 3:58pm
 
Great guitar faces - skyguy - Mar 18, 2024 - 3:33pm
 
The Obituary Page - kurtster - Mar 18, 2024 - 1:51pm
 
Despots, dictators and war criminals - R_P - Mar 18, 2024 - 12:41pm
 
Uploading Music - dischuckin - Mar 18, 2024 - 11:55am
 
Israel - R_P - Mar 18, 2024 - 11:25am
 
Media Matters - thisbody - Mar 18, 2024 - 10:03am
 
NYTimes Connections - geoff_morphini - Mar 18, 2024 - 8:26am
 
Bug Reports & Feature Requests - jarro - Mar 18, 2024 - 6:37am
 
Today in History - DaveInSaoMiguel - Mar 18, 2024 - 5:42am
 
NASA & other news from space - miamizsun - Mar 18, 2024 - 4:13am
 
2024 Elections! - R_P - Mar 17, 2024 - 11:43am
 
Basketball - geoff_morphini - Mar 17, 2024 - 11:11am
 
MEALTICKET - drinpt - Mar 17, 2024 - 4:13am
 
What makes you smile? - Steely_D - Mar 16, 2024 - 7:31pm
 
Musky Mythology - R_P - Mar 16, 2024 - 2:07pm
 
Apple Computer - GeneP59 - Mar 16, 2024 - 12:02pm
 
Mixtape Culture Club - Steely_D - Mar 16, 2024 - 11:41am
 
Environment - R_P - Mar 16, 2024 - 11:18am
 
RightWingNutZ - R_P - Mar 16, 2024 - 10:48am
 
Caching to Apple watch quit working - lsiegel - Mar 16, 2024 - 8:12am
 
Cache stopped working on old Android Phone - jarro - Mar 15, 2024 - 3:25pm
 
Talk Behind Their Backs Forum - VV - Mar 15, 2024 - 2:47pm
 
Joe Biden - black321 - Mar 15, 2024 - 2:33pm
 
Artificial Intelligence - miamizsun - Mar 15, 2024 - 12:15pm
 
the Todd Rundgren topic - Steely_D - Mar 15, 2024 - 11:01am
 
Things You Thought Today - kurtster - Mar 15, 2024 - 10:37am
 
Republican Party - islander - Mar 15, 2024 - 9:08am
 
How's the weather? - miamizsun - Mar 15, 2024 - 6:53am
 
Radio Paradise app on Android is broken - timmus - Mar 15, 2024 - 5:25am
 
Ukraine - NoEnzLefttoSplit - Mar 14, 2024 - 10:17pm
 
Democratic Party - R_P - Mar 14, 2024 - 3:04pm
 
The Chomsky / Zinn Reader - thisbody - Mar 14, 2024 - 2:00pm
 
Unquiet Minds - Mental Health Forum - thisbody - Mar 14, 2024 - 1:54pm
 
USA! USA! USA! - thisbody - Mar 14, 2024 - 12:31pm
 
China - R_P - Mar 14, 2024 - 11:52am
 
Android App Problems After Update - jarro - Mar 14, 2024 - 12:58am
 
Russia - NoEnzLefttoSplit - Mar 13, 2024 - 11:59am
 
It's the economy stupid. - kurtster - Mar 13, 2024 - 11:22am
 
How do I get songs into My Favorites - ScottFromWyoming - Mar 13, 2024 - 10:11am
 
Jazz channel? - Steely_D - Mar 13, 2024 - 9:13am
 
Vinyl Only Spin List - kurtster - Mar 13, 2024 - 2:01am
 
What Makes You Laugh? - miamizsun - Mar 12, 2024 - 11:17am
 
Frequent drop outs (The Netherlands) - ScopPics - Mar 12, 2024 - 7:20am
 
If not RP, what are you listening to right now? - Beaker - Mar 11, 2024 - 12:37am
 
• • • What Makes You Happy? • • •  - Red_Dragon - Mar 10, 2024 - 11:02am
 
female vocalists - Steely_D - Mar 10, 2024 - 9:13am
 
New Music - whatshisname - Mar 9, 2024 - 4:27pm
 
Other Medical Stuff - Coaxial - Mar 9, 2024 - 1:09pm
 
Outstanding Covers - skyguy - Mar 9, 2024 - 9:23am
 
Ridiculous or Funny Spam - KurtfromLaQuinta - Mar 9, 2024 - 8:31am
 
Oh dear god, BEES! - KurtfromLaQuinta - Mar 9, 2024 - 8:24am
 
Maybe it's just the beer talking... - Proclivities - Mar 8, 2024 - 12:04pm
 
History - lather, rinse, repeat. - R_P - Mar 8, 2024 - 10:12am
 
Big Pharma - black321 - Mar 8, 2024 - 9:33am
 
Can't find Radio 2050 in my Ocean Digital Tuner - sjagminas1 - Mar 8, 2024 - 7:57am
 
• • • The Once-a-Day • • •  - oldviolin - Mar 7, 2024 - 6:50pm
 
Music Videos - Red_Dragon - Mar 7, 2024 - 6:21pm
 
Climate Change - Manbird - Mar 7, 2024 - 2:58pm
 
what else do you listen to? (RP alternatives) - haresfur - Mar 7, 2024 - 1:43pm
 
~ Have a good joke you can post? ~ - black321 - Mar 7, 2024 - 12:17pm
 
Lyrics that strike a chord today... - oldviolin - Mar 7, 2024 - 11:56am
 
Did the punishment fit the Crime? - oldviolin - Mar 7, 2024 - 11:43am
 
The US of A telling Russia not to invade Ukraine is like... - GeneP59 - Mar 7, 2024 - 8:42am
 
Index » Regional/Local » USA/Canada » Joe Biden Page: Previous  1, 2, 3, 4 ... 101, 102, 103  Next
Post to this Topic
Steely_D

Steely_D Avatar

Location: Biscayne Bay
Gender: Male


Posted: Mar 7, 2024 - 5:57pm

My son texted me to let me know that State of the Union will likely talk about some of the work that my boy has been doing with his healthcare policy analysis and recommendations for the government.

“I've contributed in some part to things under "Taking on Big Pharma to Deliver Lower Prescription Drug Costs for Seniors and Families"”
VV

VV Avatar

Gender: Male


Posted: Mar 7, 2024 - 12:04pm

 kurtster wrote:

Not at all where I was going or even thinking for that matter.  The yet incomplete thought is that the Constitution does among other things, protects the citizens from untoward influences from the outside.  The way things are done somewhere else shall not influence say, things like decisions made in our justice system.  That our national sovereignty is about more than just our borders.

That the Constitution is a set of rules that also says how these rules can be changed.  But that the beginning point of view will always come from the Founding with primary considerations made for those who are already here.  Those who come later will adopt to the established ways and work within the system to get a consensus for change as opposed to change based upon mob rule.

This is very loosely put but I found that I had to make it clear that this was not about expressing any desire to keep anybody out.

Awwwww isn't that just precious? Kurtster twisting the merits of the Constitution to fit his myopic & xenophobic world view.
 
As I stated before, you really don't get any leeway to discuss the merits of the Constitution or your appreciation of it when you continue to support a clown who would seek to destroy it to benefit himself and put himself above it. And if destroy is too harsh a word... then at least significantly cripple it. Putin Jr.


NoEnzLefttoSplit

NoEnzLefttoSplit Avatar

Gender: Male


Posted: Mar 7, 2024 - 8:43am

 Steely_D wrote:

Which is somehow different from a straight up democracy?



that thought went through my mind too. 
Steely_D

Steely_D Avatar

Location: Biscayne Bay
Gender: Male


Posted: Mar 7, 2024 - 8:42am

 NoEnzLefttoSplit wrote:
And, yes, I welcome your opposition to mob rule. 

Which is somehow different from a straight up democracy?

rgio

rgio Avatar

Location: West Jersey
Gender: Male


Posted: Mar 7, 2024 - 5:49am

 kurtster wrote:
...

That the Constitution is a set of rules that also says how these rules can be changed.  But that the beginning point of view will always come from the Founding with primary considerations made for those who are already here. 
...

Kurt, I appreciate the effort and think it's a worthwhile discussion.

Appreciating that statement, please take the following as a conversation over a few beers down the street.  The challenge is friendly fire...

You commented on 2 things that I don't follow.   "Those already here", for which you've been chastised quite a bit already, and flexibility. 

The US was a colony at the beginning of the process we're reflecting on.  Its focus was on loyalty and support, not jobs, homelessness, and drug trafficking.  The colonies would have welcomed anyone, from anywhere, that professed allegiance and would support the separation from England.  The notion of "here now" is a way to ring-fence British citizens into being "one of us".  The perversion that somehow it was meant to focus solely on those already here is a twisted spin on the Dred Scott case, which concluded that anyone born in the colonies (including most notably slaves), was covered under "We the People".  It was about including those (previously excluded) who were here, not excluding those who weren't.

Interpretation.  Perspective.  Flexibility.

This is where the Right puts itself in a box.

When you take the position that the Second Amendment was about personal freedom and not defending the country from the British, you must fall back on "what the founders intended" in favor of common sense in light of modern society.  Rules can be changed?  Really?  You can't suggest that... the Second Amendment is religion, handed down by the Gods... and then suggest that everything else is "flexible".  Anyone holding on to the 2nd amendment tightly will need to contort their arguments and positions in every way possible to work back toward "it's not what the founders intended".  I agree with you, they would have intended flexibility.  They would likely have a completely different view of immigration, guns, and just about everything else.

There is no way that the founders considered issues for a world where a private citizen owns a company that is working to take people to Mars.  What they thought was incredible for the time, but the times have changed, and so must our application of the guiding principles upon which the country was founded.  Principles are what matter.

I gotta get another beer...want one?

NoEnzLefttoSplit

NoEnzLefttoSplit Avatar

Gender: Male


Posted: Mar 6, 2024 - 11:54pm

to clarify that a bit:

The beauty about a rights-based system is that it allows a society to set a minimum of prescriptive behavior and maximises individual liberty. 

To put it into plain text: as long as you don't go around violating the rights of your neighbours, they have no right to start telling you what to do. 
("cut your hair, go to church, etc."). Or more extreme, if someone wants to change their gender, that is their right and it is none of your business as it doesn't violate any of your fundamental rights.

So if you properly understand the spirit behind the constitution you shouldn't be getting so upset about "untoward influences from outside" etc.  It is sufficient just to protect basic inalienable rights as the US has always tried to do.
But from what I see coming out of the MAGA crowd, it is precisely these sorts of transgressions that they are peddling as being "American." 
I would argue they are precisely the opposite.








NoEnzLefttoSplit

NoEnzLefttoSplit Avatar

Gender: Male


Posted: Mar 6, 2024 - 11:41pm

 kurtster wrote:

Not at all where I was going or even thinking for that matter.  The yet incomplete thought is that the Constitution does among other things, protects the citizens from untoward influences from the outside.  The way things are done somewhere else shall not influence say, things like decisions made in our justice system.  That our national sovereignty is about more than just our borders.

That the Constitution is a set of rules that also says how these rules can be changed.  But that the beginning point of view will always come from the Founding with primary considerations made for those who are already here.  Those who come later will adopt to the established ways and work within the system to get a consensus for change as opposed to change based upon mob rule.

This is very loosely put but I found that I had to make it clear that this was not about expressing any desire to keep anybody out.

..so, yes, pretty much indeed the direction you were going. 

That there needs to be some form of arbitration goes without saying. And, yes, I welcome your opposition to mob rule. 

kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: where fear is not a virtue
Gender: Male


Posted: Mar 6, 2024 - 11:21pm

 NoEnzLefttoSplit wrote:
So this attempt to shoehorn the constitution into a form that is fundamentally exclusive, i.e. to keep foreigners and "strange" toe-licking people out, is understandable, but pretty futile. 
 
Not at all where I was going or even thinking for that matter.  The yet incomplete thought is that the Constitution does among other things, protects the citizens from untoward influences from the outside.  The way things are done somewhere else shall not influence say, things like decisions made in our justice system.  That our national sovereignty is about more than just our borders.

That the Constitution is a set of rules that also says how these rules can be changed.  But that the beginning point of view will always come from the Founding with primary considerations made for those who are already here.  Those who come later will adopt to the established ways and work within the system to get a consensus for change as opposed to change based upon mob rule.

This is very loosely put but I found that I had to make it clear that this was not about expressing any desire to keep anybody out.
NoEnzLefttoSplit

NoEnzLefttoSplit Avatar

Gender: Male


Posted: Mar 6, 2024 - 10:51pm

I dunno Kurtster, I see your pain and sense of loss. But I can't help thinking it is self-inflicted. 

This whole political era is dominated by questions of identity, not just in the United States, but globally. The old traditional lines of national borders are getting eroded by global trade, global crises and the free movement of goods and people. It is understandable that many people want to fall back on the old familiar lines where they felt secure, but that is ultimately not going to help any of us. 

So this attempt to shoehorn the constitution into a form that is fundamentally exclusive, i.e. to keep foreigners and "strange" toe-licking people out, is understandable, but pretty futile. That was not the underlying spirit behind the constitution, nor the European enlightenment of which it was born. In fact it was precisely the opposite: to protect people's fundamental rights, even when they start licking their toes in public, or worship a God that is strange to you, or criticise the King, burn the flag or any other of the myriad bizarre things that people do.

I suspect Trump is so popular because a lot of his base see him as the quintessential American - that even a guy like him who is obviously two bricks short of a load can make it, build golden towers and marry any number of Melanias. When he hugs the flag, they go all weak at the knees and think he is the embodiment of what the country is all about and therefore there can't be any conflict between his acts and the constitution, because, hey, he is a true son of the USA.

But that is to put the cart before the horse. It is true that the constitution has created the fertile ground on which America has built its wealth... "Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" as the Declaration of Independence puts it. But this was never meant to be exclusive and only benefit just a select group of people. It makes claims to universality, i.e. to ALL people, even illegal immigrants, because it honours their natural rights, which are inalienable. And THAT is the core of its success.
As soon as you start trying to interpret it to exclude groups, based on whatever metric, you are violating that principle and are going to ruin the very fertile ground on which American wealth is built.

/my 2c



NoEnzLefttoSplit

NoEnzLefttoSplit Avatar

Gender: Male


Posted: Mar 6, 2024 - 9:53pm

I strongly suspect that that train derailed by itself almost immediately.
kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: where fear is not a virtue
Gender: Male


Posted: Mar 6, 2024 - 9:38pm

 Lazy8 wrote:
 kurtster wrote:
How about future generations of the Founders ?  As opposed to those who arrived after the founding ?

 I doubt that characterization would apply to, say, you.
 
I do not understand what you mean by this.

 kurtster wrote:
How about future generations of the Founders ?  As opposed to those who arrived after the founding ?

Do you have some kind of point here? 
 

When I started I thought that I did.  I've looked at the responses while I have actually done a lot of reading on the things I brought up and am trying to figure out to tie it all together to have it make some kind of sense.  The only thing I've figured out so far is that this is of very little interest to most folks.  

The events of the day lately have become mind blowing and disrupt any kind of train of thinking.  Here's an example from local news.

Deer Creek School District faces criticism after students licked toes during a fundraiser

I cannot comprehend how something like this even got off the drawing board and approved in the first place let alone what it is all by itself.  The notion that anyone would think that this kind of behaviour is normal in the first place and then to think it was worthy for public consumption; that none of the organizers would find this just plain abnormal at any level and fit for the general public.

And in OK of all places.

This is just one of many things going on that just is so utterly ridiculous that has now become normal.  Abnormal is the new normal.  And it is being accepted as normal or at least unobjectionable because they are little things that don't have anything to do with anything else. Move along boomer, ignore what appears to be a trend and that it is so far embedded now that it cannot be undone or even that it should be.  The size of the group involved to execute this event shows how deep seated this acceptance is.  It is defended by the ends justifying the means.  But we raised $150,000.

By itself, it's a tiny thing, but these tiny little things are becoming too common, imo. And they are adding up to a death by a thousand cuts.  Me ?  I'm feeling just about bled out now.

But what do I know anymore  There's too much static in the attic to think straight anymore.  Is this how gas lighting works ?
 
kcar

kcar Avatar



Posted: Mar 6, 2024 - 2:32pm

 Lazy8 wrote:

Do you have some kind of point here? 

Lost, perhaps, in a shaggy dog hairball...

Lazy8

Lazy8 Avatar

Location: The Gallatin Valley of Montana
Gender: Male


Posted: Mar 6, 2024 - 11:03am

 kurtster wrote:
How about future generations of the Founders ?  As opposed to those who arrived after the founding ?

Do you have some kind of point here? Because I doubt that characterization would apply to, say, you.
Steely_D

Steely_D Avatar

Location: Biscayne Bay
Gender: Male


Posted: Mar 5, 2024 - 9:58pm

 islander wrote:

What about the ones that were progeny? Are they posterity too?




…and what about Naomi?!?

(Electric Company reference, kids)
islander

islander Avatar

Location: Seattle
Gender: Male


Posted: Mar 5, 2024 - 6:28pm

 haresfur wrote:


Point of clarification: Do future generations of the slaves owned by founders count, too? As opposed to the ones they brought over after the constitution was signed?

What about the ones that were progeny? Are they posterity too?


haresfur

haresfur Avatar

Location: The Golden Triangle
Gender: Male


Posted: Mar 5, 2024 - 6:02pm

 kurtster wrote:

How about future generations of the Founders ?  As opposed to those who arrived after the founding ?


Point of clarification: Do future generations of the slaves owned by founders count, too? As opposed to the ones they brought over after the constitution was signed?
rgio

rgio Avatar

Location: West Jersey
Gender: Male


Posted: Mar 5, 2024 - 3:48pm

 islander wrote:
Although I do think this clears up some of my confusion on his obsession with his 'provable heritage' to the may flower or something and the inalienable rights that go with that. 

As a documented descendant of 3 Mayflower passengers... all of you newbies need to get off my lawn!!!

Note...there are roughly 30 or 40 million descendants running around...so we can keep the lights on when everyone leaves.

islander

islander Avatar

Location: Seattle
Gender: Male


Posted: Mar 5, 2024 - 3:02pm

 VV wrote:

See? This is why you get yourself into trouble. 
 
I hesitate to ask where you feel the slaves and indigenous people fit into the picture. Just collateral damage of the Founders and their progeny in their quest for prosperity & pursuit of happiness?
  
I guess that tags me as "woke" to even bring that up? Oh well, I could give two sh*ts.
 
Of course, it's no different than what other countries have done during their colonization of foreign lands... but no less troublesome.



Yeah, so is it who got there first, or who has the most firepower to hold it?  And what if the second group decides they don't care about the opinion of the first?  Pretty much what happened with 'the founders'. Of course now if we line up on who is 'The Prosperity' of the founders and all of us latecomers, who has the numbers to maintain control?  I bet Ks opinion of who is most righteous would shift pretty quickly here.

Although I do think this clears up some of my confusion on his obsession with his 'provable heritage' to the may flower or something and the inalienable rights that go with that. 
VV

VV Avatar

Gender: Male


Posted: Mar 5, 2024 - 12:46pm

 kurtster wrote:

How about future generations of the Founders ?  As opposed to those who arrived after the founding ?

See? This is why you get yourself into trouble. 
 
I hesitate to ask where you feel the slaves and indigenous people fit into the picture. Just collateral damage of the Founders and their progeny in their quest for prosperity & pursuit of happiness?
  
I guess that tags me as "woke" to even bring that up? Oh well, I could give two sh*ts.
 
Of course, it's no different than what other countries have done during their colonization of foreign lands... but no less troublesome.

Proclivities

Proclivities Avatar

Location: Paris of the Piedmont
Gender: Male


Posted: Mar 5, 2024 - 12:23pm

 kurtster wrote:

How about future generations of the Founders ?  As opposed to those who arrived after the founding ?

The phrase "The People of The United States" does not limit to only the founders, or perhaps they may have phrased it "We, The Founders of The United States".  Anyhow, Jefferson and his committee had written that "all men are created equal", nothing about when they arrived here.
Page: Previous  1, 2, 3, 4 ... 101, 102, 103  Next