The Democratic Safe House

[DaisyDay]

But man that gay rights thread though....

Which one?

I usually find myself going to AF just to cleanse my palette of all the nonsense I find here.

What's AF?

 

[Savior2006]

Which one?

What's AF?

LOL, the recently locked one and AF means Atheist Forum.

 

[USincognito]

Looks like I might not be around much longer.

 

[DaisyDay]

Racking up points? Or have you something else that takes you away?

 

[Redac]

Taking a break from this place does wonders sometimes.

Have I missed anything good?

 

[DaisyDay]

Taking a break from this place does wonders sometimes.

Have I missed anything good?

The Inflammatory Post was pretty good, but I guess someone with no sense of humor complained because it got shut down. Otherwise there has been the usual stuff, one long Obamacare thread, the pay inequality thread went over a thousand and is still going, Michael Brown, gay marriage and racism are all hot. Were you here when the Political Memes thread broke off from Political Cartoons? That spawned a peanut gallery thread.

We got new, forum specific rules - only the person or persons actually insulted can complain about the insults and accusations of fallacies should be backed up, however briefly.

Welcome back!

 

[Hetta]

The Inflammatory Post was pretty good

How did I miss that? What an awesome thread.

 

[Gnarwhal]

I'm wondering what my fellow Dems views on ISIS are? I'm finding it difficult as a moderate-liberal to maintain a pacifist view in this situation. Their methodology, their effectiveness, and their ability to draw westerners into their fight have me disturbed to say the least.

What are your thoughts on our course of action thus far? Do you think it's too little, do you think this is the Iraq War all over again?

As much as I disdain war, as much as I disagreed with our involvement in Iraq in the past decade, I can't help but feel this time around we're not being aggressive enough.

 

[stamperben]

I'm wondering what my fellow Dems views on ISIS are? I'm finding it difficult as a moderate-liberal to maintain a pacifist view in this situation. Their methodology, their effectiveness, and their ability to draw westerners into their fight have me disturbed to say the least.

What are your thoughts on our course of action thus far? Do you think it's too little, do you think this is the Iraq War all over again?

As much as I disdain war, as much as I disagreed with our involvement in Iraq in the past decade, I can't help but feel this time around we're not being aggressive enough.

We have no dog in this fight. The Saudis, who spend the fourth largest amount in the world on their military, need to take this fight on as they are the most threatened. Saudis along with the other oil rich states in the area. Why are we fighting their battle?

 

[Gnarwhal]

We have no dog in this fight. The Saudis, who spend the fourth largest amount in the world on their military, need to take this fight on as they are the most threatened. Saudis along with the other oil rich states in the area. Why are we fighting their battle?

What do you make of the threats they're making to "invade" (whatever they might mean by that) through the Mexican border? I mean, sure they can't just send an army over the border, but more subversive tactics might be a legitimate threat.

Also, what about the fact that a lot of Western Europeans have been defecting to them? Is there a realistic possibility that some Americans will follow suit?

I read about that Oklahoma man who was fired and went on a rampage, I realize his termination was likely the catalyst for his actions, but I can't help but wonder if he would've done that had he not been Muslim?

I try my best to be open-minded and not draw rash conclusions about any group of people, but for the sake honesty, all of this stuff has given me pause.

I'm asking because I'm having trouble coming to a logical, rational conclusion.

 

[stamperben]

What do you make of the threats they're making to "invade" (whatever they might mean by that) through the Mexican border? I mean, sure they can't just send an army over the border, but more subversive tactics might be a legitimate threat.

Also, what about the fact that a lot of Western Europeans have been defecting to them? Is there a realistic possibility that some Americans will follow suit?

I read about that Oklahoma man who was fired and went on a rampage, I realize his termination was likely the catalyst for his actions, but I can't help but wonder if he would've done that had he not been Muslim?

I try my best to be open-minded and not draw rash conclusions about any group of people, but for the sake honesty, all of this stuff has given me pause.

I'm asking because I'm having trouble coming to a logical, rational conclusion.

We are probably the most militarized civilian society in history. Why wouldn't you think our country can't protect itself except by threatening the safety of our best and brightest on foreign shores?

 

[Gnarwhal]

We are probably the most militarized civilian society in history. Why wouldn't you think our country can't protect itself except by threatening the safety of our best and brightest on foreign shores?

I do, I don't think we need to deploy any assets abroad to protect ourselves at home. I really believe in Washington's sentiment about avoiding foreign entanglements, and wish we followed his warning more closely. On the other hand, unfortunately, I fear we're "in too deep" in that regard anymore (our "Special Relationship" with the UK demonstrating that).

At any rate, the rate at which ISIL is spreading, conquering territory and eliminating opposition concerns me if for no other reason than when they're finally sated, will they really turn their attention on the United States and dedicate those same resources to a constant barrage of attacks against us?

I don't want to be a pawn of the military-industrial-media complex, but I would be lying if I said the reporting wasn't influencing my thinking.

I want to be objective, and that's why I come here into the Safe House because I feel like I can trust my fellow Dems to be objective.

 

[stamperben]

For a bit more perspective check out Bernie Sander's reasoning for voting no on funding this war effort.

The senator faulted wealthy Middle East nations for doing too little to protect their own interests, especially when Saudi Arabia has the fourth largest military budget in the world. He also questioned why American taxpayers are footing the bill when royal families that rule those Mideast nations are worth hundreds of billions of dollars.

Sanders.senate.gov/newsroom

 

[FreedByte]

Previously I've posted in the libertarian thread, but I thought I'd pop in here and say hello

 

[GenetoJean]

Hello

 

[DaisyDay]

Previously I've posted in the libertarian thread, but I thought I'd pop in here and say hello

Welcome.

Now, regular readers will know that I believe we're living through something of a "libertarian moment," culturally speaking, and that I don't think this is all bad. On most of the conflicts wrapped up with the sexual revolution and its aftermath, for example, I'm on the libertarian side of the argument — though I also think libertarians too often ignore or skirt over the moral dilemmas that arise in a culture of sexual autonomy.
On economic issues, I have far less sympathy for libertarian arguments, but I'm happy that someone is making them. Libertarians can be ... fixated on one moral-political principle to the exclusion of all others. But their single-minded focus on the liberation of the individual from all forms of coercion makes them very useful to have around. Whether we're arguing about taxes and government regulations or the soft social coercion associated with received norms, practices, and traditions, it's a good thing overall for those in positions of political and cultural authority to have to justify themselves before the bar of individual liberty.

Source

 

[FreedByte]

Source

I can't say I appreciate how that article obscures historical libertarianism. It's certainly not uncommon, but many news outlets such as that one portray American capitalist libertarianism as historical libertarianism, when in reality the first use of the word libertarian in europe was associated with anti-authoritarian socialism. The Spanish Revolution is often characterized as a libertarian socialist or libertarian socialist movement.

 

[cow451]

I can't say I appreciate how that article obscures historical libertarianism. It's certainly not uncommon, but many news outlets such as that one portray American capitalist libertarianism as historical libertarianism, when in reality the first use of the word libertarian in europe was associated with anti-authoritarian socialism. The Spanish Revolution is often characterized as a libertarian socialist or libertarian socialist movement.

Generalissimo Franco is still....

 

[Savior2006]

Previously I've posted in the libertarian thread, but I thought I'd pop in here and say hello

It says your political party is Green? Not to pry but can you elaborate why you posted in the libertarian thread.

 

[FreedByte]

It says your political party is Green? Not to pry but can you elaborate why you posted in the libertarian thread.

Former libertarian (in the American capitalist sense)