A thread for Democrats Only
POSTED BY: THGRRI
UPDATED: Sunday, September 6, 2026 15:36
VIEWED: 755368
PAGE 39 of 725
Quote:I'll give you a real-life example (and some make-believe examples) about how NOT "voting against your own personal well being" can ruin a democracy.
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
Once again, you're only half delusional. How can you believe that one side is ALL BAD? I don't believe that about Democrats. In fact, I agree with a lot of traditional Liberal beliefs. It's the fucking wack jobs and extremists that have co-opted the party and subsequently taken control of it that I'm very wary of. The ones who make no bones about it that I am part of the problem simply because of my color and my gender.
It really must be nice having so much money that you feel that you can vote against your own personal well being. Most of us don't have that luxury.
In Houston, Hurricane Harvey only flooded 15% of the houses and businesses. Those 15% of local people want flood control, which will cost billions for nearly perfect control, but the cost for perfect control is only a third of the cost of damages from Harvey. It seems like a tremendous bargain! But on the other hand, the 85% who had no flood damage will get no direct benefit from perfect flood control. That 85% keep voting NO! to flood control bonds. This happens year after year. The only reason Houston has any flood control at all is Federal government money, which doesn't need popular approval.
Same thing with flood control happens with poverty. Locally 15% of the population live in poverty and that is no problem for 85% of Houstonians. The money for antipoverty comes from the Federal government because the local 85% will vote NO! to spending their money.
Or I could go on with the 50% at the top of incomes vote NO! to helping the 50% at the bottom of incomes.
With enough NO! votes a country can be wrecked. But the only thing the NO! voters are doing is voting against what doesn't benefit them.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Populist Economic Policy: Does it exist in the GOP?
Taxing the rich? That’s out. Support for labor unions. Please. Higher taxes on capital income. Not gonna happen. Government regulation to rein in the cost of pharmaceuticals? Nah. Free college for everyone? Nope. A higher minimum wage? Not a chance. Wage subsidies (the “thinking man’s minimum wage”)? That costs money, so it’s out of the question.
It’s popular these days on the right to simply declare policies they like to be populist, but that doesn’t actually make them populist. Anything truly populist is almost by definition something that corporations and the rich oppose, and that means Republicans will never be economic populists. Donald Trump sure isn’t, no matter how much he blusters about his love for the common man.
www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2018/01/theres-no-such-thing-as-populis
t-conservative-economic-policy/
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Wray threatened to resign after Sessions pressured him to fire FBI deputy director
FBI Director Christopher Wray threatened to resign after Attorney General Jeff Sessions pressured him to remove FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe.
Wray reportedly told Sessions that he would resign if McCabe was removed from his post.
Sessions also reportedly told White House counsel Don McGahn about Wray's response to the pressure for him to fire McCabe. McGahn replied by telling Sessions that McCabe wasn't worth losing Wray, according to Axios.
If Wray had resigned, he would be the second FBI director to leave President Trump's administration, after Trump fired former FBI Director James Comey.
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/wray-threatened-to-resign-after
-sessions-pressured-him-to-fire-fbi-deputy-director-report/ar-AAv2Eq8?li=BBmkt5R&ocid=spartanntp
T 
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by second:Quote:I'll give you a real-life example (and some make-believe examples) about how NOT "voting against your own personal well being" can ruin a democracy.
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
Once again, you're only half delusional. How can you believe that one side is ALL BAD? I don't believe that about Democrats. In fact, I agree with a lot of traditional Liberal beliefs. It's the fucking wack jobs and extremists that have co-opted the party and subsequently taken control of it that I'm very wary of. The ones who make no bones about it that I am part of the problem simply because of my color and my gender.
It really must be nice having so much money that you feel that you can vote against your own personal well being. Most of us don't have that luxury.
In Houston, Hurricane Harvey only flooded 15% of the houses and businesses. Those 15% of local people want flood control, which will cost billions for nearly perfect control, but the cost for perfect control is only a third of the cost of damages from Harvey. It seems like a tremendous bargain! But on the other hand, the 85% who had no flood damage will get no direct benefit from perfect flood control. That 85% keep voting NO! to flood control bonds. This happens year after year. The only reason Houston has any flood control at all is Federal government money, which doesn't need popular approval.
Same thing with flood control happens with poverty. Locally 15% of the population live in poverty and that is no problem for 85% of Houstonians. The money for antipoverty comes from the Federal government because the local 85% will vote NO! to spending their money.
Or I could go on with the 50% at the top of incomes vote NO! to helping the 50% at the bottom of incomes.
With enough NO! votes a country can be wrecked. But the only thing the NO! voters are doing is voting against what doesn't benefit them.
Well great. Until you fix the Democratic Party, my two options are to vote for the party that loudly villianizes me every chance they get, or the one that lies to me on a daily basis.
It's why I'm probably voting for J0 in 2020 if we can come to an understanding on the For The Record topic.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:GOP versus Democratic Party. Cain versus Abel. Remember that Cain is the survivor and liar in the story, while Abel is the goody-goody who gets his brains bashed in with a rock. God does not protect Abel. (“Where is your brother Abel?” asks God. “I don’t know,” Cain replied. “Am I my brother’s keeper?”)
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
Well great. Until you fix the Democratic Party, my two options are to vote for the party that loudly villianizes me every chance they get, or the one that lies to me on a daily basis.
It's why I'm probably voting for J0 in 2020 if we can come to an understanding on the For The Record topic.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
The account of Cain and Abel is remarkable for its unique combination of brevity and depth. In a few short sentences, it outlines two diametrically opposed modes of being -- both responses to the emergence of self-consciousness and the knowledge of good and evil detailed in story of Adam and Eve.
Cain's mode of being -- resentful, arrogant and murderous -- arises because his sacrifices are rejected by God. This means that his attempts to give up something valuable in the present to ensure prosperity in the future are insufficient. He fails, in consequence, to thrive, as he believes he should, and becomes bitter, resentful and murderous.
Abel's mode of being is characterized, by contrast, by proper sacrifice -- by the establishment of balance between present action and future benefit. This ensures his personal and social success, accruing over time. Unfortunately, it also makes him the target of Cain's malevolence.
This great short story is relevant personally, on the level of the family, and politically, all with equal force, all simultaneously.
www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+4&version=NIV
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
The Art of the Broken Deal
“L’état, c’est moi,” declared Louis XIV: “I am the state.” Louis was an absolute monarch, whose word was law, and serving France meant being personally loyal to Louis himself.
There were obvious advantages to such a system: no ambiguity about where authority lay, no time wasted in legislative debates, no need to cobble coalitions together to get things done. Yet Louis’s France, Europe’s most powerful state, was fought to a standstill by England and the Netherlands — a constitutional monarchy (after the Glorious Revolution of 1688) and a republic, with a combined population only a fraction as large.
And in the Anglo-French wars that followed, France generally got the worst of it, while sliding ever deeper into fiscal crisis — a crisis that eventually helped precipitate the French Revolution.
Why was an absolute monarchy weaker, in practice, than quarrelsome republics? One reason was that the very absence of limits on the ruler undermined French credibility: Whatever the king might promise, he could always change his mind. Not incidentally, France repeatedly defaulted on its debt, while post-1688 England, its king effectively constrained by Parliament, never did. As a result, England was much more successful at wartime borrowing, and paid much lower interest rates.
Which brings us, as all things do these days, to Donald Trump — a man who has evident contempt for the rule of law and who, like Louis, sees no distinction between loyalty to the nation and loyalty to himself. The main difference is that Louis seems to have at least tried to understand the issues.
On Friday night, something unprecedented happened: The U.S. government shut down temporarily even though the same party controls both Congress and the White House. Why? Because when it comes to Trump, a deal isn’t a deal — it’s just words he feels free to ignore a few days later.
Chuck Schumer, the Senate Democratic leader, seemed to have at least a short-term agreement with Trump, only to see it pulled back a few hours later. Working with Trump is “like negotiating with Jell-O,” Schumer fumed.
But what did he expect? Trump’s whole business career has been a series of betrayals — failed business ventures from which he personally profited while others, whether they were Trump University students, vendors or creditors, ended up holding the bag. And he hasn’t grown a bit in office, unless you count that mysterious extra inch in height since 2016.
Think, for example, about the international consequences of a U.S. president whose word can’t be trusted. Who can we count on to be a reliable ally, when no country knows whether America will stand by it if it needs help?
During the 2016 campaign Trump openly talked about forcing the nation’s creditors — like creditors of some of his businesses — to accept less than they were owed. Does this government have any reserve of financial credibility if something should go wrong? Probably not.
In other words, Trump’s unreliability is a big problem, over and above the substance of his policies.
The result is that promises from the U.S. government are now as worthless as those from a tinpot dictator. We don’t yet know how high a price we’ll pay for that loss of credibility, but it probably won’t be small.
www.nytimes.com/2018/01/22/opinion/art-deal-trump-shutdown.html
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by second:Quote:GOP versus Democratic Party. Cain versus Abel. Remember that Cain is the survivor and liar in the story, while Abel is the goody-goody who gets his brains bashed in with a rock. God does not protect Abel. (“Where is your brother Abel?” asks God. “I don’t know,” Cain replied. “Am I my brother’s keeper?”)
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
Well great. Until you fix the Democratic Party, my two options are to vote for the party that loudly villianizes me every chance they get, or the one that lies to me on a daily basis.
It's why I'm probably voting for J0 in 2020 if we can come to an understanding on the For The Record topic.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
The account of Cain and Abel is remarkable for its unique combination of brevity and depth. In a few short sentences, it outlines two diametrically opposed modes of being -- both responses to the emergence of self-consciousness and the knowledge of good and evil detailed in story of Adam and Eve.
Cain's mode of being -- resentful, arrogant and murderous -- arises because his sacrifices are rejected by God. This means that his attempts to give up something valuable in the present to ensure prosperity in the future are insufficient. He fails, in consequence, to thrive, as he believes he should, and becomes bitter, resentful and murderous.
Abel's mode of being is characterized, by contrast, by proper sacrifice -- by the establishment of balance between present action and future benefit. This ensures his personal and social success, accruing over time. Unfortunately, it also makes him the target of Cain's malevolence.
This great short story is relevant personally, on the level of the family, and politically, all with equal force, all simultaneously.
www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+4&version=NIV
So we're comparing the GOP to Cain and the Democrats to Abel now?
Wow.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Do you truly not see Republicans as resentful? Do they not dodge blame and personal responsibility when their lives go wrong? Instead, Republicans blame Washington DC. The tribe of Republicans descended from Cain, who lied to God right in his face. (“Where is your brother Abel?” asks God. “I don’t know,” Cain replied. “Am I my brother’s keeper?”)
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
So we're comparing the GOP to Cain and the Democrats to Abel now?
Wow.
The Adam and Eve myth shows the coming of self-consciousness – and therefore an awareness of mortality, vulnerability, the future, and good and evil. Everyone in the story immediately starts to lie and dodge the blame – Adam blames Eve, Eve blames the serpent. Then they give birth to Cain and Abel, and the first act of human history is for Cain to murder his own brother out of resentment against him and God alike, and then lie about it: “Am I my brother’s keeper?”
Resentment is powerful. We hate those who are better than us (God, Abel) and want to destroy them, then lie to hide from the consequences. Consult your resentment. It is revelatory. But cowering in your basement resenting everyone is the real pathway to darkness.
Cain is far from happy. He's working hard, or so he thinks, but God is not pleased. Meanwhile, Abel is dancing away in the daisies. His crops flourish. Women love him. Worst of all, he's a pretty good guy. Everyone knows it. He deserves his good fortune. All the more reason to hate him.
Cain broods on his misfortune, like a vulture on an egg. He enters the desert wilderness of his own mind. He obsesses over his ill-fortune and betrayal. He nourishes his resentment. He indulges in ever-more elaborate fantasies of revenge. His arrogance grows to Luciferian proportions. "I'm ill-used and oppressed," he thinks. "This is a stupid bloody planet. It can go to Hell." Not surprisingly, the GOP claims there is no greenhouse gas effect.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
“Republicans approve of the American farmer, but they are willing to help him go broke. They stand four-square for the American home--but not for housing. They are strong for labor--but they are stronger for restricting labor's rights. They favor minimum wage--the smaller the minimum wage the better. They endorse educational opportunity for all--but they won't spend money for teachers or for schools. They think modern medical care and hospitals are fine--for people who can afford them. They consider electrical power a great blessing--but only when the private power companies get their rake-off. They think American standard of living is a fine thing--so long as it doesn't spread to all the people. And they admire of Government of the United States so much that they would like to buy it.”
Harry Truman
T
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by THGRRI:
“Republicans approve of the American farmer, but they are willing to help him go broke. They stand four-square for the American home--but not for housing. They are strong for labor--but they are stronger for restricting labor's rights. They favor minimum wage--the smaller the minimum wage the better. They endorse educational opportunity for all--but they won't spend money for teachers or for schools. They think modern medical care and hospitals are fine--for people who can afford them. They consider electrical power a great blessing--but only when the private power companies get their rake-off. They think American standard of living is a fine thing--so long as it doesn't spread to all the people. And they admire of Government of the United States so much that they would like to buy it.”
Harry Truman
T
Huh....
Well, I'm for tying the minimum wage to inflation immediately, and removing the social security tax on anyone making under 100k. This means 1 of 2 things.
1. I'm not Republican.
or
2. #NotAllRepublicans
Pick one.
And while you're at it, T... Remind us why it is exactly that you are not a Democrat, since you always say that you're independent, but you denounce Republicans as much as you extol Democratic principals.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME