The open political discussion thread. Read the first post!

[eTiMaGo]

This is a thread open to everyone to discuss politics and debate amongst each other. It will be lightly moderated (i.e. flaming, ranting and soapbox kind of posts, that would be inappropriate in other threads, are fine, but personal attacks are not. In light of the current President of the USA, racist and bigoted comments won't be tolerated either).

Two important notes:

1) This will be the ONLY political-related thread on YarisWorld. Any new thread/posts which we deem suitable, will be merged into this one.

2) While we will be lenient on aggressive behavior <b>in this thread</b>, if you bring that attitude into the rest of the forum, we will deal with it as with any other public flaming. Be prepared and have a thick skin.

Suggestions, comments, we're just a PM away...

[eTiMaGo]

Looks like I'll get the ball rolling... As we are aware, there's talks of Texas seceding from the rest of the US, becoming its own country... And who has stepped up to become president? None other than Chuck Norris... Are we to take this seriously? discuss.

[SailDesign]

Originally Posted by eTiMaGo

Looks like I'll get the ball rolling... As we are aware, there's talks of Texas seceding from the rest of the US, becoming its own country... And who has stepped up to become president? None other than Chuck Norris... Are we to take this seriously? discuss.

Did we take Ronald Ray-gun seriuosly when he ran for President of the Whole Shebang? Kinda....
I guess if Chuck is the kinda guy that Texans WANT for a president, that'll work, but be careful what you wish for.

[GeneW]

Originally Posted by SailDesign

Did we take Ronald Ray-gun seriuosly when he ran for President of the Whole Shebang? Kinda....

Yes. Some of us literally bled for Ronald Reagan. Later, once we learned what a screw up he was about certain things, we regretted supporting him.

I do not understand the Cult of Reagan. Most of the people that I know who idolized Reagan did not understand how Reagan betrayed his own principals, especially about the War on Drugs, and later how he supported the Brady Campaign. They compare W Bush to Reagan, but I remember Reagan, and he would have dismissed Bush's spending and pointless wars as foolishness.

That being said, was Reagan a stupid man? No. He was very idealistic. I think to a large extent the collapse of the USSR and the Eastern Bloc was facilitated (but not caused) by Reagan's pressure on the USSR. Many people in Eastern Europe I think owe Reagan a debt of gratitude.

Gene

[GeneW]

Looks like the EPA has ruled in agreement with the Courts that Carbon Dioxide and other "greenhouse gases" are a menace to public well being. They are doing this under the aegis of the Clean Air Act.

I was not aware that the Clean Air act allowed for computer models and shoddy experimental data when considering a change in law.

It's easy to see how NOx can lead to photochemical smog, how SOx can damage plants or how soot can damage property. These are easily demonstrable.

Human caused global warming, at least to me and many others, is a whole other issue. The science is simply not there at this time in history. Science is not consensus, science is data and interpretation of data, and not computer models, anecdotes and so on. Certainly science follows the rules of logic, among them being rejecting arguments that rely upon authority.

It's ironic to me that the US FDA insists upon clinical studies to show the efficacy of a drug but the EPA goes along with computer models and anecdotes.

I'm sure that owners of the Chicago Climate Exchange are warming up for the big shafting that they're going to deliver to the American people. I am also confident that manufacturers in China and India are getting ready to take more good paying manufacturing jobs as American businesses are pushed offshore.

As far as "Green Jobs". Where, besides paperwork and enforcement? If consumers demanded green energy we'd have it. They don't, because they are not convinced that it's worthwhile.

Gene

[SailDesign]

Originally Posted by GeneW

It's ironic to me that the US FDA insists upon clinical studies to show the efficacy of a drug but the EPA goes along with computer models and anecdotes.

No contention here, Gene, but the EPA do not have the luxury of "full-scale" tests here. The world itself IS the full-scale test. What do you want to do if it fails?
The penalty for failure in this case is quite literally the end of life as we know it. Say what you want about methodology, but this is the case. The FDA can "afford" to have tests run ,and people die or be seriously injured in such tests. The "Patient" in the EPA's case is all of us, and I'm not willing to take the risk that their projections are wrong. Even if their projections are RIGHT we are not in a good place right now.
Science is about more than "cold, hard facts", science is the knowledge to make informed projections. I do it every day with knowng roughly how my boats perform. Computer predictions. Not perfect, but when it's all you have, it's better than nothing.

[SIPNGAS]

It's just sad this "politics only thread" was implemented only after we lost a couple of good, albeit controversial in thought, members.

[MadMax]

No problem, we can create new ones!

As a resident of the Lone Star State, I can assure you that the recent political humor and comments from governor Rick Perry about succession have no serious basis. The recent Tea Part protests have probably been the catalyst for such talk, but the truth is that there is about as much chance of Texas becoming an independent republic again as my Yaris doing a 7.592 second quarter mile time at the local drag strip.*

I think all the talk is simply because of some of the radical proposals by the new administration. It has nothing to do with loyalty to the previous one either, whereas GW's popularity is probably higher in Texas than it is in most other parts of the country, his term as president has done nothing to encourage or support the alleged discussions on succession.

When Texas says it is like "A Whole Other Country," there is a lot of truth behind that statement. It is not an attempt to separate itself from the Union, but a recognition of the unique history and mindset that exists here. It is obviously not everyone's cup of tea, but I challenge you to find any state who the majority of its residents are as loyal to it as Texas. And that 'mystic' is even recognized all over the world, when I tell people I am from here it always generates much interest and enthusiasm that never occurred when I mentioned other states I have lived in (Florida, Maryland, Idaho, etc).

The bottom line is that all this talk about succession is just that, talk! But if there was any one state that would have the cojones to succeed, it would be Texas!

And, just to keep this thread going, as I am really appreciative of the moderators for allowing us such candid and open discussion; one of other reasons I like Texas so much is it is a very pro-gun state. Now, I also understand that not everyone feels that way; but I would still like to hear your non-hostile reasons for your opinion, just so we can discuss the issues and not attack anyone personally. It is far from being a cut-and-dry topic, as there are valid arguments for both sides; but in my opinion I believe there was clear intent on the part of our forefathers for including the Second Amendment in our Constitution, and I do not believe any administration should have the right to put restrictions on that which has been clearly stated in the governing document for this country!

Cheers! M2


* - That 1/4 mile time was posted by a 1987 Buick Grand National T-Type

[SailDesign]

Originally Posted by MadMax

<snip>

one of other reasons I like Texas so much is it is a very pro-gun state. Now, I also understand that not everyone feels that way; but I would still like to hear your non-hostile reasons for your opinion, just so we can discuss the issues and not attack anyone personally. It is far from being a cut-and-dry topic, as there are valid arguments for both sides; but in my opinion I believe there was clear intent on the part of our forefathers for including the Second Amendment in our Constitution, and I do not believe any administration should have the right to put restrictions on that which has been clearly stated in the governing document for this country!

Guns - a fun topic, and for some reason VERY contentious over here.

Let me explain my own background first, as itr has bearingon my opinions. I was born in the States, but was moved to England at the age of 5. I grew up there, thinking Limey and sounding Limey and generally not worrying much about the fact that I was a US citizen all the time.

In the UK, whe nI lived ther, you could have a gun if you wanted, but you needed a license. Famrers could have shotguns or rifles for pest control or sporting reasons, target shooters could have target guns, and so on. BUT - you needed to have each gun registered and a license to own it.

Then came Dunblane, and all kinds of guns were outlawed, including the very guns and ammunition used in Olympic pistol shooting. The whole British team had to practice in France.

In 1984, I moved to the States again, with an English wife and kids. I reclaimed the .22 target rifle I used while briefly at college here, a Winchester 52, and over time (we lived on a arm) added a 20ga shotgun and a couple of "sporting" rifles to the collection. I joined the NRA so I could shoot competitively, but un-joined when every week saw another rabid pro-gun advert, or another invitation to "protect my rights" by giving $$ to the Legal Fund.

My own view is that all guns should be registered. Just like cars. Do you bitch about having to register a car? Probably not - it is just one of those things you accept. I know some municipalities have a limit on how many cars you can own without being termed a "fleet" and being subject to an addition tax or license. On the island I live on, there is a limit to how many dogs you can own without being considered a "kennel" and having to apply for a license. This is small-town politics, and I can easily see a town saying "register your guns, but if you have more than (say) 20, we will consider you an "arsenal" and you wil need a special permit". Again if you are not breaking the law with them, then you have nothing to fear (except NRA-style paranoia).

I would register all of my guns in a heartbeat, but the local PD does not have a protocol for that.

My 2-cents.

[GeneW]

I've been told that Bob's banishment has been lifted. When he comes back is his own choice.

Originally Posted by SailDesign

Guns - a fun topic, and for some reason VERY contentious over here.

My own view is that all guns should be registered. Just like cars. Do you bitch about having to register a car?
My 2-cents.

Two views of government.

Theory A- People surrender some of their own power to the government in order to make things work for the common good. In this sense the US is a form of limited Anarchy. I think that this limited Anarchy has benefited us in some cases because freedom to chose is freedom to produce.

Theory B- People are subjects of the government, that laws are passed for the common good or for the benefit of the State. In such a State there is a Monopoly of Lethal Force by the State. Only they can harm others except in self defense. In Britain even the concept of Self Defense is under attack. People have been jailed for "fighting back" beyond a proportional defense. This is insane but that's a Labour Government for you.

Theory A is the idea upon which the United States was founded. Contained in the Declaration of Independence.

To a believer in Theory A it makes no sense to "register" one's source of personal power with the State. The State has no damn business taking it away from you, except as punishment for a crime and as such has no business knowing what you have until you break the law.

Some of us think that the original intent of the 2nd Amendment to the US Bill of Rights was akin to the old tradition of Archers in England, that to be Well Regulated (accurate shooters) one must practice routinely. Which you cannot do when the State keeps all of the weapons under its control. To me the 2nd Amendment does not explicitly outlaw gun registration, only forbids prohibition of owning a gun.


Theory B is the foundation of a typical modern State, such a Great Britain, which changed from the Divine Right of Kings to a Constitutional Monarchy, and finally today to a Parliamentary Democracy with a Royal Figurehead.

To someone who believes in Theory B owning a firearm is a privilege which can be taken away at any old time. Registering a firearm facilitates confiscation of a gun, either from an individual because of some deviancy on their part or because the State has decided to ban some or all firearms.

The grotesque over reaction in Britain after the Dunblane Massacre is a good example of where registration can lead. Handguns in Britain were kept in "shooting clubs" and were not permitted to be carried on the streets. The Dunblane shooter broke the law. Oh well...


My practical concern with registration is that registration lists have been abused by gun control groups, who have published them. If a woman has a right to privacy under Roe v Wade than certainly I have a right to privacy from the public regarding what I own. I am concerned that Insurance companies may be sued or bullied into levying insurance increases upon those who have registered firearms. There has also been use of gun registration lists to confiscate guns.


To a person who believes in Theory B, owning a firearm is a gesture of political defiance. When you own a gun under a State which claims monopoly of Lethal Force you are challenging its authority. Under such a government owning a gun is a political act.

Owning a car does not challenge the State since the State does not claim a monopoly on transportation. Owning a car is not a political act.

Registering Cars is a mechanism for generating revenue, from the sales of license plates and annual registration fees. Each car is already uniquely identified by its VIN. Aside making it convenient for Police a license plate has no practical purpose except revenue generation. Even auto theft is not an issue - the victim would hand over their VIN number to police.

Many US states have gun registration and have not seen decreases in crime. In several instances gun confiscation followed registration (California and NYC assault weapon bans, and in some cases New Orleans gun confiscation following Katrina).

I see no compelling reason for a national gun registry. I see every reason to be suspicious of the idea of registering guns, especially given the hostility of some interest groups in the US towards ownership of firearms. At this point in history it would be practically impossible to confiscate firearms in the US. A national gun registry would simplify the process of confiscation, with no gain in terms of public safety.

Gene

[MadMax]

Sorry, I forgot to mention that Chuck Norris has about a snowball's chance on a mid-summer San Antonio day of serving in any elected position down here in Texas. His comments on World Net Daily and on Glenn Beck's radio show just show how out of touch the man is with reality. I think he's taken a few too many roundhouse kicks to the old cranium!

Anyhow, he isn't even a native, he is originally from Oklahoma and his only connection to this state is that lousy TV show he did (I've met numerous Texas Rangers, and they are nothing like the character he played). Sure, it may have emulated Texas values, but it was way too campy to be taken seriously down here. It would be the same as thinking the old Batman TV show (which rocked, by the way!) from the 60s was real!

Not everyone down here are like Hank and Peggy Hill (but I gotta admit they do characterize many old school Texans I have met!).

Cheers! M2

[Bob_VT]

I believe that some members are owed an apology. Reverse racism is applied here daily and it is not a good sign.

People with the power have abused it and thrown it into people faces.

The TX thing is not new..... there have been threats like that in New England for quite some time.

[BLAZINBLUEVITZ]

Originally Posted by Bob_VT

I believe that some members are owed an apology. Reverse racism is applied here daily and it is not a good sign.

People with the power have abused it and thrown it into people faces.

.

[Bob_VT]

The primary reason is that the posts moved from political to personal. When a moderator comments in any post in the capacity of a regular member then he/she can no longer remain objective and surrenders the ability to "moderate" in that thread.

I enjoy the fact that eTiMaGo who is French.... living in Thailand.... with an American quote in his signature participates. Someone has to keep the Canadians and Aussies in check!!!!

Keep this in mind..... we (members in the USA) pay the politicians salary.... we have the right to get upset ....... we pay for it!

[jambo101]

Originally Posted by Bob_VT

Keep this in mind..... we (members in the USA) pay the politicians salary.... we have the right to get upset ....... we pay for it!

Its just astounding the rest of the world at what poor losers the republicans are to the point that various factions want to succede from their own country. just lighten up its just another president whos reign will come and go just like the rest and America will still be a great place to live when he's gone.
On a recent trip to Florida i noticed a media phenomenon that the rest of the world doesnt see and thats shows like Rush Limbaugh,Glen Beck,Hannity,Coulter, and a plethora of others who are making big bucks by trashing the countries new president on a daily basis and inciting the defeated republicans with every mannor of trashtalk they can think up.

eTiMaGo you may regret opening up this political can of worms.

[eTiMaGo]

Originally Posted by jambo101

Its just astounding the rest of the world at what poor losers the republicans are to the point that various factions want to succede from their own country. just lighten up its just another president whos reign will come and go just like the rest and America will still be a great place to live when he's gone.
On a recent trip to Florida i noticed a media phenomenon that the rest of the world doesnt see and thats shows like Rush Limbaugh,Glen Beck,Hannity,Coulter, and a plethora of others who are making big bucks by trashing the countries new president on a daily basis and inciting the defeated republicans with every mannor of trashtalk they can think up.

eTiMaGo you may regret opening up this political can of worms.

Well I am not the most politically-savvy person around... I admit I enjoy taking potshops at W as much as anyone else, but on the other hand I often ask myself if it;s really fair, how would Gore have handled 9/11 and its aftermath? (or more scarily, would it have even happened?)

So in the same line of thinking, I don't quite understand all the ragging on Obama.. Sure, he made a lot of promises (what politician doesn't?), but he's only been in office for what, 3 months and people are clamoring for instant hope and change... Give the guy some time is all I say.. What if McCain had won? Would he have turned the world economy around by now?

And that's just the problem with politics, no matter what happens, there'll be a large group of people opposed to it and making noise (or worse, look at the events over here in the past year). Heck, wasn't it Lincoln who said you can only please some of the people all of the time, or all of the people some of the time?

I mean, think about it... The only way to get everyone to stop bitching is for money and high paying jobs to fall out of the sky... the world does not really work that way, sadly!

[1NZYaris1]

Originally Posted by Bob_VT

The primary reason is that the posts moved from political to personal. When a moderator comments in any post in the capacity of a regular member then he/she can no longer remain objective and surrenders the ability to "moderate" in that thread.

I enjoy the fact that eTiMaGo who is French.... living in Thailand.... with an American quote in his signature participates. Someone has to keep the Canadians and Aussies in check!!!!

Keep this in mind..... we (members in the USA) pay the politicians salary.... we have the right to get upset ....... we pay for it!

Aussie bashing does not belong in this thread ,
That's a job for us KIWI's , and we are aloud to do it anytime and anywhere. just joking . anyone can make fun of an Aussie

[MadMax]

And just to show that you can't completely generalize a politician by their party, the following has re-invigorated my faith in some members of the Democratic party...

Wednesday, March 18, 2009

Today in a letter to Attorney General Eric Holder, 65 Democrats in the U.S. House of Representatives, led by Congressman Mike Ross (D-AR), expressed their opposition to the reinstatement of the failed 1994 ban on semi-automatic firearms and ammunition magazines. These congressmen cited numerous studies that proved the 1994 ban was ineffective, and they strongly urged Attorney General Holder to stop his effort and instead focus on the enforcement of existing gun laws.

to those who decided to represent their constituents, and not the views of some in their party! This is a major bipartisan move on some in the Democrat party, and I hope the GOP not only recognize this but also ensures those representatives receive due credit!

Cheers! M2